The tariff; a review of the tariff legislation of the United States from 1812 to 1896

This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project
to make the world's books discoverable online.

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject
to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books
are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover.

Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the
publisher to a library and finally to you.

Usage guidelines

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we have taken steps to
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.

We also ask that you:

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for
personal, non-commercial purposes.

+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.

+ Maintain attribution The Google "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe.

About Google Book Search

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web

at |http : //books . google . com/

The Tariff

A Review of the Tariff Legislation of the
United States from 1812 to 1896

By
William McKinley

a^''-

'■ '^ Z'^

G. P. Putnam*8 Sons

New York and London

Vbe ftnfcfterbocfiev ptCBB

1904

Cr.\'2RAL

\1-^

*'^?^

COPYRIGHT, Z896
FT

THOMAS E. O'SHEA

PUBLISHERS' NOTE.

The essay presented in this volume was written by the
late William McKinley in the spring of 1896, a few
weeks before his nomination for the first term of his
presidency. It was prepared for use in connection with
a reprint that was then in course of publication of the
Writings of Henry Clay. The adherents of the protec-
tive policy have, as a rule, referred to Henry Clay as the
founder of the protective system in the United States,
and it is the case that the Tariff of 1824, which was
framed under Clay's personal direction, was the begin-
ning of the series of tariffs which had for their purpose
consideration of protection of American producers as
well as to some extent the requirements of the national
treasury.

The protective system as it exists to-day, having been
accepted, during the greater number of years since the
war, by a majority of the voters of the country as the
national policy best suited in their judgment for the
nation's industrial requirements, may very properly be
connected with the name of William McKinley.

The bill bearing McKinley's name, which was en-
acted in 1890, is the basis of the tariff that is in force in
1904. It was the case that Mr. McKinley, as chairman of
the Committee of Ways and Means in the House, not only
gave to the act his name, but gave to the preparation of
the schedules months of arduous toil. He was himself a
thorough and conscientious believer in the principles of

iii

iv PUBLISHERS' NOTE

protection and in the contention that the needs of our
country could best be furthered, and could in fact only be
properly farthered, by a system of high tariff taxation.

The Dingley Tariff Act, which is the law now in force,
was enacted under Mr. McKinley's presidency and repre-
sented the policy of his administration and the personal
beliefs of its head. The Dingley Tariff Bill stands for
the high-tide of the protective system.

If there be value in the theories of the protectionists,
and if it be possible to add to the wealth of the country
by creating under the authority of the government ob-
stacles to foreign commerce and barriers to the introduc-
tion of foreign productions, the Dingley Tariff Act ought
to insure for the citizens of the United States, an endur-
ing measure of prosperity.

This was the full belief of President McKinley,
although it is the case that, during both his presidential
terms, and particularly during the last year of his life,
he expressed himself as strongly in favor of bringing
about, by means of reciprocity treaties, some modification
in the protective system and a lowering of the barriers
which stood in the way of trade with certain countries,
provided that these countries would extend reciprocal
concessions on the productions of the United States.

The essay presents a comprehensive survey of the
history of protection in the United States and of the
grounds on which successive generations of American
statesmen have been prepared to confirm and to extend
the system. It constitutes, therefore, a valuable addition
to the economic history of the country, and also to our
political history, which has been so largely based upon,
and interwoven with, economic conditions.

PUBLISHERS' NOTE y

This essay, taken in connection with the speech on re-
ciprocity treaties which was the last utterance of Presi-
dent McEinley, constitutes also a valuable expression of
his methods of thought and of his understanding of the
purposes and the results of the protection creed of the
Republican Party.

The volume should, therefore, be found of special in-
terest during the present year, when the Bepublican
Party is again presenting for the approval of American
voters a platform which provides for the maintenance
of the protective measures of McKinley and Dingley. It
is on this ground that the publishers have thought it in
order to make separate publication of the essay in con-
venient form for ready reference and for general dis-
tribution.

New Yobk, April 10, 190i.

CHAPTER I.

THE TARIPP IN THE DAYS OF HENRY
CLAY AND SINCE

Hbnbt Clay was oonspicuottsly and always a protec-
tionist As the acquaintance or friend of many of the
founders of the Gbvemment, and of their immediate sue-
essors in office, he learned from them his early lessons
in political economy and statesmanship, and profited by
thw* illustrious example. Bom in Virginia in 1777,
he had revered Washington with the ardor of youth;
had become the clerk and proteg^ of the learned and
venerable Chancellor Wythe ; and was inspired to his
first oratorical efforts by the splendid eloquence of
Patrick Henry. Agreeing with the doctrines of Adams
and^ Hamilton, he yet espoused the cause of Jefferson
and entered Congress in 1806, during his second term
as President Intimately associated with that great
statesman, he participated with Madison, Monroe, and
the younger Adams in the administration of the Gov-
ernment^ and for forty years earnestly advocated the
great principles for which they in common contended.
■^As Speaker of the House of Representatives he sup-
ported the several protective tariff laws — ^five in num-
ber—enacted from July 1, 1812, to February 5, 1816,
which enabled the Government to successfully defray
the extraordinary expenses of our second war with Eng-
land« These laws increased the entire list of duties one
hundred per cent. ; doubled the rates, and placed a

8 THE TABIFF IK THE DATS

further duty of ten per cent upon the goods imported
in foreign vessels, besides the large tonnage-tax of $1.50
per ton to the vessel Under such a policy the Ameri-
can market was resei*ved for the American manu£eu>
turer; and, notwithstanding the severe drain and waste
of the war, our country emerged from it more prosper-
ous and wealthier than it had been at its beginning.

It was at this period that Mr. Clay embraced with
such fervency the advocacy of internal improvements
and the firm establishment of the protective theory as
the two great essentials of what he termed ^^ the Ameri-
can system.^' In a speech in January, 1816, he said :

'^I would effectually protect our manufactories. I

would afford them protection not so much for the sake

of the manufacturers themselves as for the general

interest"

Jhis w as the jmimating principle of his whole oaner.

Despite the caution of Mr. Madison against precipi-
tancy,* Congress supplanted these measures with the
act of April 27, 1816, greatly reducing the war duties.
This bill did not receive the vote or support of Mr-
Clay. Its effects were foreseen and deprecated by him,
and were described some years later as ^^ most deplora-
ble." ** We behold," said he, " general distress pervad-
ing the whole country; unthreshed crops of grain
perishing in our barns for want of market ; an alarming

* In his special message of Febmary 20, 1815, transmittiiig a copy of the
treaty of peace with Bnglaad, President Madison declared: "There is no
subject that can enter with greater force and merit into the deliberations of
Congress than a consideration of the means to preserve and promote the
manufactures wliich have sprung into existence and attained an unparalleled
maturity throughout the United States during the period of the European
wars. This source of National independence and wealth I anxiously recom-
mend, therefore, to the prompt and constant guardianship of Congress."

OF HENBY CLAY AND SINCE. 8

diminution of the circulating medium ; univerBal com-
plaint of the want of employment, and consequent
reduction of the wages of labor. To add to these evils
there is^ above all, a low and depressed state of the
value of almost every description of property in the
Nation, which has, on an aiverage, sunk not less than
fifty per cent, within a few years."

Gol. Benton's picture of the deplorable condition was
no less graphic '^ No medium of exchange exists,^' said
he, !'but depreciated paper; no change even, but little
bits of foul paper, marked so many cents, and signed by
tradesman, barber, or innkeeper ; exchanges deranged to
the extent of fifty to one hundred per cent Distress
the universal cry of the people, relief the universal
demand thundered at the doors of all legislatures. State
and FeideraJ."

Mr. Clay made a gallant effort to enact a more
efficient thriff in 1820, and carried his bill through the
House, to be indefinitely postponed in the Senate by a
single vote. It was at this time that he said :

^The War of the Revolution effected our political
emancipation. The late war (1812) contributed greatly /-^'^
ta our commercial freedom, but our complete independ-
ence will only be consummated after the policy of
protection shall be recognized and adopted.''

No relief ca^jaeuntilthe paasage of the act of May
22, 1824> ^whic h was largely the work of Mr. Clay, and
enacted through his controlling skill and geniua This
was not a partisan measure, nor was it enacted by
sectional divisions in either branch of Congresa

In the House, for example, the bill was supported by
such prominent Democrats as James Buchanan, of Penn-

r

4 THE TABIFF IK THE DAYS

sylvania; Louis McLane, of Maryland, and Samuel
Houston, of Te2cas ; in the Senate, by such leaders as
Andrew Jackson, of Tennessee, Thomas H. Benton, of
Missouri, Martin Van Buren, of New York, and Richard
M. Johnson, of Kentucky. It will be observed that in
this conspicuous group are three statesmen who each
subsequently became President of the United States,
and one, GoL Johnson, Vice-President. All gave ardent
support to the doctrine of protection as the great essen-
tial to our industrial and commercial prosperity.

In the vote on the passage of the bill in the House,
New England cast fifteen yeas, twenty nays; the Mid*
die States, sixty yeas, fifteen nays; the South, fourteen
yeas, sixty-four nays; and the new States of the West,
Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois, eighteen yeas, but not a
solitary negative vote. Kentucky, also, imder the lead-
ership of Mr. Clay, was a unit in its faror.

It was in the course of this debate that Mr. Clay
delivered his celebrated speech. of March 81, 1824,
which is to this day a strong and effective argument
for the protective policy. In discussing the relative
advantages of foreign and domestic trade, he said:

^The greatest want of civilized society is a market
for the sale and exchange of the surplus of the pro-
duce of the labor of its members. This may exist at
home or abroad, or both, but it must exist somewhere
if society prospers; and wherever it does exist it should
be competent to the absorption of the entire surplus of
production. It is most desirable that there should be
both a home and a foreign market. But, with respect
to their relative superiority, I can not entertain a doubt
^The home market is first in order and paramount in

OF HENBY GLAT AND BINCE.

importance. The object of the bill under consideration
is to create this home market, and to lay the foundations
of a genuine American policy. The creation of a home
market is not only necessary to procure for our agricul-
ture a just reward for its labors; but it is indispensable
to obtain a supply of our necessary wants^ If we can
Bot sell, we can not buy. The sole object of the tariff
is to tax the produce of foreign industry with a view to
promoting American industry.^'

The effects of this legislation were inamediate and
gratifying, realizing tl^ predictions of its friends and
promoters. Every class felt the revival of business and
the general pro^enfy y the factory, the farm, our ship-
ping, mercantile, commercial, and mining interests all
enjoyed the change. Some years later Mr. Clay him-
self bore eloquent testimony to the improved conditions
of the country. In his memorable speech in the Senate
on February 2, 1882, he said :

"If I were to select any term of seven years since
the adoption of our present Constitution which exhibi-
ted a scene of the most undisputed dismay and desola-
tion, it would be exactly that term of seven years
which immediately preceded the establishment of the

tariff of 1824 .If the term of seven years were

to be selected of the greatest prosperity which the
people have enjoyed, it would be exactly that period of
-seven years which immediately followed the passage
of the tariff of 1824.'^

With the act of 1828, still further increasing the
duties, Mr. Clay had no immediate part, as he was then
Secretary of State. In the earlier tariff debates Mr.
Calhoun had appeared as a protectionist, and Mr. Web-

6 THE TABIFF IN THE DAYS

ster as his opponent In 1834 their positions* were
exactly rerertied, and in 1828 Mr. Webster again
favored an increase of duties. Most of the distin-
guished Democrats already mentioned were supporters
of the law of 1828, and to their aid that great leader
Silas Wright, of New York, contributed the weight of
his splendid abilities. Five gentlemen who sub-
sequently became President were recorded on the pas-
sage of the act — Van Buren, William Henry Harrison
and Buchanan for, and Tyler and Polk against it
Never in any subsequent period of our history have the
duties been higher, or the protective principle more
rigidly sustained.

The condition of the National faanewwas emi-
nently satisfactory ; the publisjiebt-^as being rapidly
reduced, and the Treasiu^inAtaiBed a surplus. Under
these conditions, Mr. Clay, again in the Senate, in May,
I^^SSOt offered a resolution ^^for the immediate abolition
of all duties on all articles not coming into competition
with similar articles made or produced in the United
States, except those oa wines and silks, which ought to
be reduced." This was opposed by Mr. Hayne, of
South Carolina, and others, who proposed instead a re-
duction of all duties, but after much discussion the
acts of May 20 and May 29, 1880,— three in all-
were passed. The first reduced the imports on cocoa^
tea and coffee. The other two, passed May 29th, pro-
vided, respectively, for a decrease in the duty on
molasses, with a drawback on spirits, and for a reduc-
tion of the duty on salt.

No general reduction, however, was made until two
years later. Then President Jackson recommended a

OF HENBY CLAY AND SINCE. 7

revision of thqLJtarifl^ ftpdrenrfanuary 9, 1832, Mr. Clay
renewe3TiijMPe8qlut^^ on non-

competing jirticles. ^ . Thp opposition . demanded the
change of rates to a revenue standard. This Mr. Clay
earnestly opposed. In his great speech of February
2, 1832, he said:

"The fiQl of the protective policy would be pro-
ductive of consequences calamitous indeed. When I
look to the variety of the interests involved, to the
number of individuals interested, the amount of capital
invested, the value of buildings erected, and the whole
arrangement of the business for the prosecution of the
various branches of the manufacturing arts which have
sprung up under the fostering care of this Government,
I can not contemplate any evil equal to the sudden
overthrow of all these interests. History can produce
no parallel to the extent of mischief which would be
produced by such a disaster. The repeal of the edict
of Nantes itself was nothing in comparison with it.
That condenmed and brought to ruin a great number
of persons; the most respectable portion of the popu-
lation of France were condemned to exile and ruin by
that measura But^ in my opinion, the sudden repeal
of the tariff policy would bring ruin and destruction
on the whole population of this country. There is no
evil, in my opinion, equal to the consequences which
would result from such a catastropha"

Iir the same debate he expressed what was to him
always a firm conviction when he declared :

'' Gentlemen deceive themselves ; it is not free trade
that they are recommending to our acceptance. It is
in effect the British or colonial system that we are in-

8 THE TABIFF IN THE DAYS

vited to adopt, and if this policy prevail, it will lead,
substantially, to tbe re-colonization of these States,
under the commercial dominion of Great Britain.'^

The result of the contention was the revision of the
tariff on the lines proposed by Mr. Clay, as provided in
the act of July 14, 1832. The position of Mr. Clay
was identical with that of ez-Fresident John Quincy
Adams, who, on May 22d, submitted a report to the
House from the Committee on Manufactures, ably sus-
taining the protective policy. In the course of his
argument, Mr. Adams said :

"Under that system of policy (the protective) the
Nation has risen from a depth of weakness, imbecility,
and distress to an eminence of prosperity unexampled
in the annals of the world. It. was by counter legisla-
tion to the regulations of foreign nations that the first
operations of the Government of the United States
were felt by the people ; felt in the encouragement and
protection given to their commerce ; felt in the fulfill-
ment of the public engagements to the creditors of the
Nation; felt in the gradual discharge of the debt of
gratitude due to the warriors of the Revolution ; felt
in the rapid increase of our population, in the con-
stantly and profitably occupied industry of the people,
in the consideration and respect of foreign nations for
our character, in the comfort and well-being and happi-
ness of the community ; felt in every nerve and sinew,
in every vein and artery of the body politic." •

South Carolina assumed to be greatly offended that the
reduction of duties was not much larger, and proceeded
to place herself in an attitude of hostility to the General
Government by promptly passing a law, commonly

OF HENBY CLAY AND SINCE. 9

known as tbe ^^ Ordinance of Nullification," declaring
that the new tariff was unconstitutional and void, and
should not be collected in that State* Proclamation
was made, by the authority of the Legislature, that if
the Government of the United States should in any
way attempt to enforce the tariff laws by means of its
Army and Navy, then "South Carolina will no longer
consider herself a member of the Federal Union."

The cause of her advocacy of nullification and seces-
sion, however, as Col. Benton observes in his " Thirty
Years' View " was really " not the tariff at all, but the
institution of human , slavery.^' Mr. Calhoun realized
that the policy of protection to home industry was in-
imical/to the employment of cheap or enslaved labor.

President Jackson met the issue boldly, and in Feb-
rury, 1838, secured the passage of what was designated
at the time as ^' the Force Bill,'' by which he would have
undoubtedly secured the collection of the revenues in
South Carolina, had the nullification movement not been
promptly abandoned. In his efforts for peace and the
Union, however, Mr. Clay had meanwhile been active in
the attempt to secure the passage of a bill, which, while
it would provide a gradual reduction of duties, would
still preserve intact the protective system. His ideas
were embodied in the bill he introduced in the Senate
on February 12, 1888, (which became a law in two
weeks, or on February 26th,) that is known as one of
the three great '^ Compromises " with which his name
and fame are so inseparably connected.

The friends of Jackson, Clay and Calhoun were for
once united in support of the same measure, and it
passed the Senate by a vote of twenty-nine to sixteen.

10 THE TARIFF IK THS DATS*

Still some of the strong men of that body, Webster,
Benton, the venerable Samuel Smith, of Maryland, and
Mahlon Dickerson, of New Jersey, voted against it. A
bill to reduce the tariff had previously passed the House
but Mr. Clay's bill was accepted by it as an amendment
and passed that body immediately by a vote of 119 to
85. Four of the six New England States, and Dela-
ware, New Jersey, and Missouri voted solidly against it
and all the Southern members but two for it.

Taking the tariff of 1882 as the basis, the '<J\aj Com-
promise '^ provided for an ultimate reduction of duties
on all imports to a uniform level of twenty per cent ad
valorem. One. tenth of the excess above twenty
per cent was to be taken off on January 1, 1834;
one tenth on January 1, 1886 ; one tenth on January
1, 1888 ; one tenth on January 1, 1840 ; three tenths
on January 1, 1842, and the remaining three tenths
on July 1, 1842. The "compromise'* consisted in
the swift reduction of duties after January 1, 1842, as a
concession to the "Nullifiers, '' and the slow and gradual
reduction prior thereto as a concession to the protec-
tionists.

The new law calmed the excitement in the South, but

its effects were otherwise unhappy and disastrous. More

than any other one cause it is generally charged that

K it occasioned the great financial crisis of 1887, a sad

A period of gloom and disaster almost equal to that which
had preceded the enactment of the tariff of 1824.

Mr. Clay believed that experience would, as it did,
speedily teach the people a just appreciation of the ad-
vantages of protection to home industry. He believed
that " the American system would soon become firmly

OF HEKBY GLAT AND SINGE. 11

planted in the bosoms and affections of the people.'*
He had in no sense forsaken his creed ; he simply sought
to save the protective principle from disuse and aban-
donment Never were the policy or opinions of any
statesman more completely vindicated.

Within five years a panic swept over the country that
almost beggars description for its severity and distress.
Not only were manufactures prostrated, but commerce,
navigation, mining, and . especially agriculture, shared
in the general ruiiL The scenes Clay and Benton had
80 vividly portrayed in 1824 were repeated, only as de-
velopment had increased, the losses now appeared still
more frightful. Mortgages were foreclosed and forced
Bales made in every direction ; thousands of able-bodied
men were out of work, or toiling at not more than
twenty-five cents per day ; while other thousands, un-
able to obtain employment at any price, with their
wives and children, were obliged to appeal for charity,
and rely upon the free soup-houses, which were estab-
lished in every city, for the only food they could procure.

Sophistry can not withstand the piercing gaze of
public opinioiL Theories will not avail against facts.
False leaders appealed in vain, but the people attributed
their distress in great part to the existing tariff, and
when opportunity again came, as it did in the National
election of 1840, they overthrew and drove from power,
in every branch of the Government, the party they
held responsible for it^ by most surprising majorities.

As a result of this great revolution, and in obedience
to the popular will. President T^ler, although himself a
free-trader, felt constrained, on August 30, 1842, to
give^Iisasient 16 anoWe7"great"pr(ftec ti ve tariff law.

12 THE TABIFF IK THE DAYS

The IiiM;oTy of its passage is peculiarly interesting*

The Twenty-seventh (Congress was Whig in both
branches by a majority of thirty-one on joint ballot —
the Senate, Whigs 28, Democrats 22 ; and the House,
Whigs 133, Democrats 108. At the beginning of the
session, in December, 1841, Millard Fillmore, the Whig
leader of the House, moved the reference of so much of
the President's message as related to the tariff to the
Committee on Manufactures, the customary and proper
reference, to the Committee which had framed all the
tariff bills of our earlier Congresses.

Charles G. Atherton, of New Hampshire, the leader
of the Democratic side, moved as a substitute to refer it
to the Committee on Way and Means. His purpose
thereby, as he fully avowed in debate, was that ^the
revision of duties should be made with exclusive refer-
ence to the raising of revenue, and that the pro-
tection of our industrial interests should not be con*
sidered at all." Even without the final reduction under
the Compromise tariff of 1888, which was to occur on
July 1, 1842, the revenue was not sufficient for the
support of the Government, and Mr. Clay had insisted in
the Senate that the duties of necessity must be raised for
that object alone to at least thirty per cent, ad valorem.

Mr. Atherton's motion was lost Seventy-one Demo-
crats and twenty-four Southern Whigs voted in the
affirmative, but they were overruled by the negative
votes of ninety Whigs and fourteen Democrats — the
latter all from Pennsylvania but three. The subject
was then referred to the Committee on Manufactures^
by whom a bill and report were promptly presented.
Hon. Walter Forward, of Pennsylvania, Secretary of the

OF HENBT CLAT AND BIKGE. 13

Treasury, also made an elaborate repoit, and submitted
a bill to Congress, and a third bill and report were sub-
sequently offered by the Senate Committee on Manu-
facturea

The bills were in accord in recognizing the principle
of protection but differed in details. The best features
of all three were embodied in a bill that passed the
House on July 16th, by the vote 116 to 112. William
Farmenter, of Massachusetts, was the only Democrat
who voted in the affirmative. Fourteen Whigs and
ninety-eight Democrats voted in the negative.

The supporters of the bill included John Quincy
Adams, William Pitt Fessenden, Francis Oranger,
William Cost Johnson, William L. Goggin, Kenneth
Bayner, of North Carolina, Nathaniel G. Pendleton and
Jeremiah Morrow, of Ohio, Richard W. Thompson and
Henry S. Lane, of Indiana^ Thomas F. Marshall, of
Kentucky, Zadoc Casey, of Illinois, and Jacob M.
Howard of Michigan. It passed the Senate on August
5th — ^yeas twenty-five, all Whigs; nays twenty-three,
all Democrats but three.

To the very general regret and surprise. President
Tyler vetoed the bill, because " it did not suspend the
distribution of the proceeds of the sales of the public
lands among the several States of the Union,'^ which
had been provided by an act passed in September,
1841, that he himself had signed. Congress received
his message with great indignation and the House
attempted to pass the bill over his veto, but this failed
for want of the required two-thirds vote.

Another but substantially the same bill was passed
by both branches of Congress within the next fortnight

V

14 THE TARIFF IN THE DAYS

and this, too, was vetoed by Mr. Tyler. His second
veto message, on motion of ex-President Adams, was
referred to a special Committee of Thirteen, of which
Mr. Adams became Chairman, and in such capacity
wrote a scathing report against what he characterized
as the President's arbitrary and inconsistent actions.
He declared that Mr. Tyler ought to be impeached, and
this was the general opinion of the Whigs of the
country, both in and out of Congress, although they
realized that such a thing was impossible

This report so irritated the President that he sent a
protest to the House in which he sought apparently to
interfere with its legitimate functions and powers.
John Minor Botts, of Virginia, theraupon offered the
same resolution* which the Senate had adopted in
1834 (and for which Mr. Tyler had himself voted), in
censuring President Jackson for a somewhat similar
action. This was adopted by a strictly party-vote —
yeas (Whigs), 87 ; nays (Democrats), 46.

A provisional tariff bill, to supply revenue until
something more satisfactory could be agreed upon, was
next attempted. In the discussion of this bill in the
House, on August 22d, Hon. Thomas T. McKennan,
of Pennsylvania, moved to strike out aU after the
enacting clause, and insert the bill which had been twice

*The student of history will recall that this was the Senate resolution
offered by Mr. Clay in his controversy with President Jackson about the
remoTal of the QoTemment deposits from the United States Bank at
Philadelphia. It was adopted by the Senate, on liarch 28, 1884, by a vote
of twenty-six to twenty, and read as follows :

Beaolved, That the President, in the late executive proceedings in relation
to the public revenue, has assumed upon himself authority and power not
conferred by the Constitution and laws, but in derogation of both.

It was for this resolution that Mr. Tyler, then a Senator from Virginia,
had voted.

OF HEKBT CLAY AND BINGE. 16

▼etoed already, omitting the section regarding the
distribntion of the proceeds of the sales of land, and
the clause imposing a duty of twenty per cent, ad
valorem on tea and coffee. He was a new member, but
8o great w;as his ability and so persuasive his eloquence,
that his motion prevailed and the bill passed the House
by the close vote, yeas 105, nays 108. Of the
affirmative votes, eighty-five were Whigs, and twenty
Democrats, ten of the latter from New York, nine from
Pennsylvania, and one from Massachusetts. Of the
negative votes, sixty-eight were Democrats, and thirty-
five Whigs; some of whom, although staunch protection-
ists, would not surrender their convictions as to the
land controversy in any emergency.
* This bill, with some further slight modifications,
passed the Senate, on August 27th, by the bare majoi^
ity of a single vote — ^yeas, twenty-four ; nays, twenty-
three. Twenty Whigs and four Democrats (Ruel Will-
iams, of Maine, Silas Wright, of New York, and James
Buchanan and Daniel Sturgeon, of Pennsylvania)
voted in the affirmative, and fifteen Democrats and
eight Southern Whigs in the n^ative. It numbered
iEunong its supporters George Evans, Richard H. Bayard,
Rufus Ghoate, John J. Crittenden, William L. Dayton,
and William A. Graham. The House concurred in the
Senate amendments, and, to the general surprise, the
bill was promptly approved by the President

The framers of the new law were evidently im-
pressed with the truth of Mr. Clay's wise maxim enun-
ciated when referring in former years to ad valorem
duties. " Let me fix the value of foreign merchandise,"
said he, "and I do not care what your duty is."'

^

16 THE TARIFF IN THE DAYS

Specific duties were substituted for ad valorem as far as
possible throughout the whole list It proved a wise
and beneficent measure, even more strongly protective
than its friends at first had thought it would be. During
the four years it was in operation it raised the country
from the depths of financial depression and distress to a
condition of confidence and prosperity such as it had
not enjoyed since 1882.

So widely popular was the new law that in the Pres-
idential campaign of 1844, the Democrats in the critical
Northern States were as earnest and outspoken advo-
cates of it, and the doctrine of protection, as the friends
of Mr. Clay. Their candidate for the Presidency, Hon.
James E. Polk, of Tennessee, had uniformly voted
against protective measures in Congress, but on the
other hand Hon. George M. Dallas, of Pennsylvania,
the Democratic candidate for Vice-President, had as
a Representative been an active supporter of all such
bills. It was this fact, more than any other, that led
to his nomination.

Indeed, in the exigencies of the campaign, Mr. Polk
himself felt constrained to write his &iend, Mr. John
E. Kane, of Philadelphia, on June 19, 1844, the only
avowal of political principles he made *' for the public
eye'' after his nomination. In this letter he declared
that he had "voted for the tariff of 1832," the act of
all others most offensive to South Carolina, and desired
to '^ afford reasonable incidental protection to home in-
dustry " in keeping with " the policy of General Jack-
son on this subject" " In my judgment," said he, " it
is the duty of the Government to extend, as far as it
may be practicable to do so, by its revenue laws, and

OF HEKBT CLA7 AND 8IKCE. 17

all other means within its power, fair and just protec-
tion to all the great interests of the whole Union, em-
bracing agricoltore, manufactnres, and the mechanic
arts, commerce and navigation."

By this and similar assurances the fears of the pro-
tection wing of the party were put to rest This was
true in Pennsylvania especially, then ^^ the pivotal State "
of the Union, for there the efforts of Mr. Dallas and Mr.
Buchanan were successful in October, and the prestige
of this triumph practically insured the election of Mr.
Polk. It was so successful that Mr. Polk not only
received majorities in the manufacturing centers of New
Jersey, New York and Pennsylvania, as " a better pro-
tectionist than Clay," but the planters of Alabama^
Greorgia and Mississippi were induced to support him
with equal unanimity because as the Democratic
leaders in those States declared, ^^ Polk was, and always
had been, the consistent and uncompromising enemy of
the protective policy."

His election accomplished, Mr. Polk called into his
Cabinet^ as Secretary of the Treasury, Hon. Robert J.
Walker, of Mississippi, a zealous free trader, who was
willing to go to any extreme in support of his theo-
ries. As Senator he had opposed the law of 1842, and
was well known to be intent upon its repeal.

The Twenty-ninth Congress, elected in 1844, was
Democratic in both branches, so that the Admimstra-
tion could reasonably expect to direct its fiscal legisla-
tion« Mr. Walker at once assailed the protective law
"given to the country by a Whig Congress" in terms
of great severity. He submitted a report upon the
tariff in which he arraigned our manufacturers as but

18 THE TABIFFCK^ THE DATS

little better than public coospirators, gtiilty of both
deceit and extortion. His report was hailed with de-
light in England, but found little favor at home.

Richard Gobden declared that ^^he had never read a
better digest of the arguments in favor of free trade
than that put forth by Mr. Secretary Walker and ad-
dressed to the Congress of the United States.'^ He
commended Mr. Polk's annual message of December,
1845, also, and ^^congratulated his (British) associates
that both President Polk and Mr. Secretary Walker
had taken the task out of our hands of lecturing to the
people of America upon the subject of free trade."'
Indeed, this was the general opinion of English leaders,
so freely declared that the House of Lords ordered the
report of Secretary Walker to be printed and dis-
tributed throughout the kingdom.

Encouraged and supported by the President, Mr.
Walker at length secured not only the repeal of '^ the
odious Whig law,'' but the enactment of a bill meetr
ing his own views, then and since commonly known
/as " the Walker tariff." This was not done, however,
\ without disagreement m the Cabinet, heated contests
in Congress, and much dissatisfaction among the rank
and file of the Northern Democracy.

The vote in the House, on the passage of the bill,
July 8, 1846, resulted — ^yeas, 114; nays, 98. Among
those voting in the n^ative were twenty members from
the South, including such Whig leaders as Ghurett
Davis, of Kentucky ; Meredith P. Gentry, of Tennessee ;
James Graham, of North Carolina; John S. Pendleton,
of Virginia; and Robert Toombs and Alexander H.
Stephens, of Georgia. These men joined heartily with

OF HENBY oBlT AND SINCE. 19

such prominent leaders of the North as John Quincy
Adams, Gteorge Ashmun and Robert C. Winthrop,
of Massachusetts; Charles J. Ingersoll and James Black,
of Pennsylvania; Jacob CoUamer, of Vermont; Caleb
B. Smith, of Indiana; Washington Hunt, of New York;
and Columbus Delano, Robert C. Schenck and Joshua
R. Giddings, of Ohio, in every effort to retard or
defeat the bill.

In the Senate, the contest was still more stubborn
and uncertain, and is a familiar and memorable inci-
dent in the annals of American politics. The body
^waa evenly divided upon it and the Adminstration
prevailed in the end only through the action of Vice-
President Dallas, who, contrary to his own oft-ex-
pressed convictions and life-long affiliations, gave the
casting vote in favor of the passage of the bill.

The test vote was taken on July 28th, twenty-seven
Senators voting for the bill, and twenty-seven against
it Of those voting in the affirmative, seventeen were
from the slave-holding States and ten from the free, all
Democrats. Of those voting against the bill eleven
were from the South, and sixteen from the North, all
Whigs but three — John M. Niles, of Connecticut^ and
Simon Cameron and Daniel Sturgeon, of Pennsylvania.
Despite the attempts to divide the Whigs on sectional
lilies^ some of the strongest leaders of the South stood
side by side with Webster, Corwin, Evans, Niles and
Cameron in upholding the cause of protection. Crit-
tenden, of Kentucky, Berrien, of Georgia, the Claytons,
of Delaware, Mangum, of North Carolina, and Reverdy
Johnson, of Maryland, eloquently sustained the policy
of their party and good of the country. President Polk

90 THE TABIFF IK THE DAYS

was quick to approve the law, and^ it went into effect
August 80, 1846.
,/Cj By tEe^new law the duties were for the first time ex-
clusively ad valorem. On articles where the protective
principle had directly applied under the old law the
duties averaged about twenty-four per cent. It em-
braced nine schedules, under the headings A to I, respect-
ively. The first schedule, spirits, bore a duty of one hun-
dred per cent; the second, tobacco, spices, wines, pre-
served fruits and meats, forty per cent; the third, rated at
thirty per cent carpets, cotton, silk, linen, wool, glass,
leather, sugar, iron, and minor articles ; the next four
fixed rates at twenty-five, twenty, fifteen, ten, and five
per cent respectively upon the bulk of the merchandise
then imported to this country ; the remaining schedule
was devoted to an enlarged free list The average
duties under the law, on the importations of 1847, were
twenty-seven and seven-tenths per cent.; but in 1856
they fell to twenty-one and sixty-eight-hundreths.

It was the boast of the author of this law, and it is to
this day claimed by his adherents, that the so-called
Walker tariff ** remained unchanged for eleven years,
during which^me the country enjoyed great prosperity;
and that it was then voluntarily amended by its friends
only in the direction of their well established free-
trade policy." Wl^le-itis'a'fact that the law was not
amended until 1857, it is a matter of dispute whether it
brought "prosperity to the country,'' and it is not true
that the people ever gave it their express approval.

Indeed, in the Congressional elections of 1846, when
the country was engaged in a foreign war and the
patriotic impulses of the people would naturally have

OF HENBY CLAY AKD SINCE. 21

led them to sustain the Administration, so great was the
indignation over the new tariff, that a Democratic
majority of sixty-two in the House was changed to a
Whig majority of three — ^a clear Whig gain of sixty-five
in a total membership of 227. Seldom since has
the country witnessed so striking a condemnation of
any measure by public opinion.

Again, in the Presidential campaign of 1848, it was
dseu totho toriff^pdli eyuif the Administration that Penn-
sylvama jpiroa herelectoral vote to Taylor instead of
Cass, thereby d^eating the ktter. The State had been
Democratic since the days of Jefferson ; it had sustained
Jackson ; it had voted for Van Buren, in 1886 ; for Polk,
in 1844 ; and, in 1848, no divisions were apparent within
the party on the question of slavery. Yet Taylor carried
the State over both Cass and Van Buren by about 2,300
votes, and over Cass alone by 18,500. Had Cass re-
ceived the electoral vote of Pennsylvania, despite the
loss of New York, he would have been elected. In that
State, at least, the people did not endorse, or at all ap*
prove, of " the noble impulse given to the cause of free
trade, by the repeal of the tariff of 1842, " commended
by the Democratic National platform.

During the National campaigns of 1852 and 1856, and
in the Congressional elections of 1850, 1854, and 1858,
the constant and exciting contentions over slavery en-
grossed public attention. No other political issue was
discussed, nor was the condition of the business affairs
of the country from 1847 to 1856 generally such as to
especially excite partisan differences. Anticipating for
the moment the passage of the law of 1857, let us con*
sider the claim of the advocates of free trade that this

93 THE TABIFF IN THE DAYS

country enjoyed "unexampled," or "great and excep-
tional prosperity, from 1847 to 1861," the period when
the tariff- for -revenue -only policy held sway in the
country.

Simultaneous with President Polk's approval of the
Walker bill came the declaration of war with Mexico.
This led to the employment of an army of 100,000
men, and the outlay of more than $160,000,000 among
the people for its support, above the ordinary expendi-
tures of the Government, during the next two years.

Before this stimulus to our manufactures and trade
began to subside, a terrible famine occurred in Ireland.
This caused an unprecedented demand for our bread-
stuff and brought to the United States extraordinary
shipments of specie. Then followed the European rev-
olutions of 1848, by which the trade and manufieu^tures
of the entire continent were disturbed, and in some dis-
tricts suspended. Importations to the United States
were stopped, and for the time being our manufacturers
enjoyed both the home market and a profitable foreign
trade.

Next came the discovery of gold in California, carry-
ing to our Western shores the surplus population of our
manufacturing and agricultural districts, and sending
back to the East abundant streams of the precious
metals. Such a condition was more than accidental —
it was in the highest degree fortunate and providential.

During the six years following 1848 it drew to the
Pacific Slope from the older States a splendid popula-
tion of enterprising and vigorous citizens, and added to
the wealth of the world more than $640,000,000, in the
output of gold alone. With such advantages we

OF HENBY CLAY AND SINCE.

23

should have become not only immensely wealthy, but
amply able to meet every demand of the Government
without borrowing a dollar for years to come had we
possessed a wise fiscal policy.

But in 1864 the output of gold showed signs of
decline and fisdlure, and then, by another of the
remarkable incidents of the time influencing our busi-
ness conditions, the Crimean war broke out — a war
between England, France, and Russia, three of the
leading powers of Europe and the world. ^'Con-
fusion worse confounded'' reigned in the industrial
circles of Europe for the next two-and-a-half years, and
during this period the United States enjoyed the richest
harvest she had ever before reaped from foreign lands.
Our country could hardly have been depressed under
such remarkable conditions. But when peace came to
Europe, manufacturing was resumed in England and
France with greater energy and with more alluring
prospects for trade in America than had ever before
been known.

Then, naturally, and inevitably, with our vastly
increased importations, and consequent dependence
upon foreign £EU^ories, our whole business situation was
swiftly changed from apparent prosperity to actual
distress. The tariff-for-revenueK)nly policy rested at
length solely upon its own merits. We were as
a nation pursuing the hazardous experiment of spend-
ing abroad the money we should have kept at
home. The gold of California, the largest product of
that precious metal so far discovered in any country,
was speedily drained by Europe. Within a year after
the close of the Crimean war, this country was dis-

'^/. .

84 THE TABIFF IN THE DAYS

tressed and humiliated by the only financial panic it
had experienced for twenty years, since the adoption of
a somewhat similar tariff policy to that it was then
pursaing.

After the Democratic victory in the Presidential
camjmign of 1856, the administration of Mr. Pierce,
under the influence of Secretaries James Guthrie, of
Kentucky, and Jefferson Davis, of Mississippi, made
haste to secure the passage of an act to still further
reduce existing duties. Our importations were already
unprecedentedly large, but it was claimed that the
revenues -^ere more than the Government required, or
could properly apply in its legitimate expenditures,
including the payment of the_Natioaal-debt. Accord-
ingly the law of M^h 8, 1857, was enacted. It passed
the House by a voteof ii8 to 72, and met with but
little opposition in the Senate. The members from the
Western States were the most conspicuous of those
from any section in speaking and voting against it.
Questions of "popular sovereignity" and "free soil
for free men" were absorbing the public mind both
in and out of Congress. Party lines were not
drawn, nor was any general apprehension manifested
as to the bad policy of the pending measure. The
new duties averaged about nineteen per cent ad
valorem, with abundant loopholes for undervaluation
and fraud, and afforded probably less protection than
those of any other tariff law in our history.

r^ The immediate effect was an increase in importations,
and a heavy drain upon the specie of the country,
while there was a marked reduction in the exportation
of our agricultural products. A financial crash was

OF HENBY CLAT AND SINCE. 35

inevitable, and it fell with disastrous force upon the
country in the fall of 1857 within six months after the
passage of the new law. The panic soon swept over
the entire Union, prostrating alike our agricultural,
commercial, mining, and manufacturing interests.

The need of relief everywhere was so apparent that
President Buchanan in his first annual message, on
December 8, 1857, felt constrained to appeal to Con-
gress to do all in its power "to increase the confidence
of the manufacturing interests and give a new impulse
to business." His description of the condition of the
times is .so striking that it bears frequent repetition.

"In the midst of unsurpassed plenty in all the pro- \
ductions and elements of National wealth," said he, " we
find our manufactures suspended, our public works /
retarded, our private enterprises of different kinds/
abandoned, and thousands of useful laborers th^?ewnr
out of employment and reduced to want." Then came
the admission, which has always been made wheik.
ever the free trade policy was adopted, that "the sanie
causes which have produced pecuniary distress through- /
out the country have so greatly reduced the amount of
imports from abroad that the revenue has proved
inadequate to meet the necessary expenses of the
Government."

The stagnation of business and paralysis of trade and
enterprise continued during the next four years, with
severe and widespread distress, almost as great and ex-
hausting as during the previous low-tariff financial de-
pressions of 1819-24 and 1837-42. It was impossible
to repeal the new law, even if the Administration had
attempted it.

36 THE TABIFF IN THE DAYS

In this period of fifteen years, from 1847 to 1861, in-
clusive, during which the economic theories of Mr.
Walker prevailed, the total receipts from customs were
$708,107,973, while the outlays of the Oovemment were
$807^138,078. Consequently the expenditures exceeded
the receipts by $99,025,105, Thus as strictly revenue
measures the laws of 1846 and 1867 were both un-
satisfactory. During the eleven years of the contin-
uance of the tariff of 1846, the expenditures of the
Government exceeded its receipts $21,790,909. Of
this deficit, $8,205,805 occurred during the years 1855,
1866, and 1857; so that when the act of 1867 was
passed, it should have been apparent that while the ex-
penditures were constantly increasing, the revenue was
steadily diminishing. During the three years named
our imports of merchandise exceeded our exports by
nearly $123,000,000, while our exports of specie
amounted to $182,500,000. During the four years of
the operation of the tariff of 1857, the total receipts
from customs were $184,125,000, and the expenditures,
$261,359,196. Thus the expenditures of the Govern-
ment exceeded its receipts $77,234,196, and the new law
was shown to be even more inadequate for revenue
purposes than that of 1846.

Unsupported by the fortunate events which had for
ten years given us the appearance of great prosperity,
our own vast product of gold, and the benefits accruing
to our people by reason of a great foreign war, the
system did not sustain itself for a single year. Instead*
of our having a large balance of trade always in our
favor, as should have been conspicuously the case, our
foreign imports exceeded our exports of home

OP HENBY CLAY AND SINCE. 27

products by the tremendous sum of $448,854,907,
while the exports of our specie exceeded the im-
ports of money from other countries by the startling
aggr^ate of $406,519,261. Can it be doubted that if
the protective policy had been steadily maintained
during this period and the duties had remained as fixed
by the tariff of 1842, that there would have been not
only an abundance of revenue, but that the public
debt, principal and interest, would all have been
extinguished, and the Treasury able to furnish abund-
ant means to defend the imperiled life of the
Ifation at the outbreak of the Civil War? Instead,
our credit was gpne and it was with great difficulty
that the Oovemment could borrow money either at
home or abroad, and then only by selling our bonds
bearing a high rate of interest at a heavy discount.
An able financier has stated his confident belief that
$200,000,000 in specie, which he declares could readily
have been provided by a protective tariff between 1860
and 1860, would have kept the National debt $1,000,-
000,000 below the vast sum it attained during the war.
Certain it is^ that with a surplus instead of a deficit in
the Treasury, the Nation would not have been put to
the shame of ^' having its paper hawked in the money
markets at the usurious rate of one per cent a month.'^
Yet to this condition we were reduced under a revenue
tariff in the summer of 1860.

Never was there a period in our history in which the
free trade policy had so excellent an opportunity to
demonstrate its usefulness and adequacy to our indus-
trial «nd governmental conditions. But, instead of in-

* James G. Blaine.

28 THE TABIFF IK THE DAYS

suring prosperity, it produced universal distress aud
want ; instead of raising money to support the Govern-
menty even during a time of peace and wonderful
development, the system pX^lutiecK it provided was
utterly insufficient and produced results exactly the
opposite of those olnimed fwit. As soon as the foreign
wars ceased, the revenue began to diminish and the
i expenditures to exceed it, thus creating deficiencies and
enforcing loans and increasing our National debt from
$15,500,000, in 1846, to $90,580,000, on Maroh 4, 1861.
. While it may be claimed that in the Presidential
campaign of 1860, the tariff played no decisive part,
and that other issues controlled, still at the Republican
National Convention, next to the resolutions opposing
the spread of slavery into territory then free, the fol-
lowing declaration of the platform is reported to have
elicited the most pronounced* applause :

"While providing revenue for the support of the
General Government by duties upon imports, sound
policy requires such an adjustment of these imports as
to encourage the development of the industrial interests
of the whole country. We commend, therefore, that
policy of National exchanges which secures to the
workingman liberal wages, to agriculture renumerative y ^
prices, to mechanics and manufacturers an adequate
reward for their skill, labor, and enterprise, and to the
y Nation commercial prosperity and independence."'

This was accepted then and has always and every-
where since been accepted as a cardinal doctrine in the
creed of the Republican parfy. Seldom, if ever, has it

* Murat Halstead, In the Cincinnati Commercial, an eye-witness of all the
National Conventions of this year.

OF KmiiT'^Ji^'>^iia(€ sikce. 29

been better stated than in these significant sentences.
Both wings of the discordant Democracy stood ready
to join issae upon the tariff, bat it was necessarily of
subordinate interest in most of the States. In Ohio,
Indiana, Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey, and
Connecticut, however. Republican chances were de-
cidedly benefited by the position of the party on the
tariff. Pennsylvania had been carried in 1856
against General Fremont for President, and in 1857
against Hon. David Wilmot, for Governor, directly
upon the slavery issue. The majority for Mr. Buch-
anan had been 82,800; and for Hon. William F. Packer,
over Mr. Wilmot, 42,750. It will be remembered that
Mr. Wilmot was personally the very embodiment of the
anti-slavery issue, and that issue in 1860 was in no re-
spect more favorable to the Republicans, in any of its
various phases, than it had been in 1857. Without the
discussion of the tariff, it was confidently asserted by
men of all parties, that in all probability Pennsylvania
would have been lost by the Republicans in October,

• and that would inevitably have defeated the National

• ticket in November.

** The Republican candidate for Governor, Hon.

• Andrew G. Curtin, was quick to realize this condition
^ of public opinion. It was very largely due to his effect-
^.^ive appeals to the workingmen of the State, that Re-

• publican success was assured. In an increased vote,
JMr. Cui^tin carried the State in October by a majority
^f 82,164, and thus insured it for Mr. Lincoln, who

-triumphed over all opposing candidates by nearly

• 60,000. Prom beginning to end of the campaign Mr.
^ Curtin devoted the greater part of his time to the dis-

30 THE TABIFF IK THE DATS

cusslon of the tariff, and his brilliant victory not only
electrified the Republicans of the State and Nation, bnt
deariy demonstrated the strong hold the protective
principle had upon the affections of the people.

During Mr. Buchanan's entire term the receipts of
the Treasury were insufficient to meet the appropria-
tions of Congress and the Government steadily incurred
a large debt. To check this increasing deficit, the
House, which was controlled by the Republicans, in-
sisted upon a bill providing a sc ale of duties which
iiTAnTj^ifi^H f Iftrg^^ roTTOTinnj tinA qu May 10, I860,
succeeded in passing it. This bill had been prepared
and reported by Hon. Justin S. Morrill, of Vermont-
It/ met with but little favor on the 'majority side of the
Senate, and was postponed until the nejct session. At
that time, owing to the absence of the Southern mem-
bers, the whole aspect of affairs was changed. The
Republicans suddenly found themselves in control of
the Senate, and the bill was favorably reported, with
amendments increasing the proposed duties. The Senate
passed the bill on February 20, 1861, by a strict party
vote — ^yeas twenty-five, all Republicans ; nays fourteen^
aU Democrats. The South was represented by members
from Arkansas, North Carolina, Tennessee and Vir-
ginia, and to their negative votes were added those of
Stephen A. Douglas, of Illinois, Joseph Lane, of Ore-
gon, and other Northern Senators. The test vote in
the House was taken February 27th, and resulted in
favor of the bill — ^yeas, 102; nays, 43. Of those in
opposition, twenty-eight were from the South and fif-
teen from the North. Seven prominent Southern
leaders, noted for their subsequent devotion to the

OF HENBT CLAT AND SINCE. 31

Union, voted for it. The Administration was within
forty-eight hours of its close, when on March 2, 1861,
Mr. Buchan^^ajBltproved the law. In his earlier career
he ha^'c^istently upheld the protective doctrine, and
now doubtlessly welcomed the opportunity to again
record himself in its favor.

CHAPTER II.

The Thirty-seventh Congress convened in special
session on July 4, 1861. It was Republican in both
branches. Perhaps no legislative body ever enacted so
many important and beneficial laws in a single short
session^ ending August 6th. It met President Lin-
coln's demand for $400,000,000 and 400,000 men
bravely, and all its measures for the prosecution of the
war were signally successful It initiated many legis-
lative departures, and its work will remain the admir-
ation of the student and model of the legislator.

The "Morrill tariff,'' so called, had gone into effect
on April Ist, and was amply sustaining the hopes of its
enactors and friends. It not only provided an in-
creased rate of duties, but it authorized the payment
of outstanding Treasury notes, and a loan of $10,000,-
000. It met the exigencies so well that a general
revision was not attempted at the extra session. By
the law of August 5, 1861, however, the dutiable list
was extended, as Th^ddeus Stevens, of Pennsylvania,
Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee,
estimated, so as to add annually about $22,500,000 to
the revenue. Its scope was again extended at the reg-
ular session, by the act of December 24, 1861. Under
this, the duties on tea, coffee and sugar were increased,
directly as a war measure. General tariff acts increas-
ing the duties, and rendering more certain their prompt

OF HENBT CLAY AND SINGE. 83

aad easy collection were also passed with comparatiyely
little opposition on Jaly 14, 1862, June 80, 1864, and
Marcli 3, 1866.

The law of 1862 was especially effective. Not only
did it practically shut oat rainous competition by f or>
eign mannfacturers, bat it provided an internal revenae
that in 1866 reached the stapendoos aggr^ate of over
$309,000,000, or a million dollars for each working day
in the year. The tax on incomes provided by it
yielded $72,982,000, or more than the entire receipts
of the United States Government for all parposes in
any year of oar history prior to the outbreak of the
Civil War.

Perhaps the law encoantering greatest resistance was
that of 1864. This was determinedly opposed by the
Democratic leaders, but passed the House, on June 4th,
by a vote of 81 to 26, and the Senate, on June 17th, by
22 to 5. The returns from these measures were in the
highest degree satisfactory. The receipts from customs
from the beginning to the close of hostilities, and for
the years immediately succeeding the war, were far
greater than had been expected. In 1862 they ex-
ceeded $49,000,000; in 1868, $69,000,000; in 1864,
$102,816,000; and in 1865, about $85,000,000. In
1866| at the dawn of peace, the customs receipts in-
creased to $179,000,000, or more than twice as great a
sum as had ever been raised in any year by any pre-
vious tariff, revenue or protective, in our entire history.
In 1867 the receipts were $176,417,000; in 1868, $164,-
464,000 ; in 1869, $180,048,000 ; and in 1870, $194,538,-
000. Equally vast or greater sums were collected by
the Government from internal taxes, under authority

84 THE TABIFF IN THE DATS

of these acts, increasing annually from $87,640,000, in
1862, to $809,226,000, in 1866.

As soon as our great armies had been disbanded,
however, the Republican leaders in Congress b^an at
once to discuss measures for reducing the volume of
direct taxation, and, as far as possible, to limit the
expenditures of the Government to its resources from
customs dues and a tax on spirits and tobacco. By the
acts of July 18, 1866, and March 2, 1867, reductions in
internal taxes were made amounting to $105,000,000.
Reductions were made in the taxes upon about four
hundred articles of manufacture, on saving banks, and the
gross receipts of corporations, the aim being to reduce
the total internal revenue to an amount not exceeding
$265,000,000 per annum, making due allowance for the
increase of business and growth of the countiy. The
receipts for 1867 exceeded this amount by but $100,000,
yet Congress, by the act of March 2, 1867, removed
$40,000,000 in taxes: $19,500,000 from incomes,
$4,000,000 from clothing, $8,500,000 from woolens,
$3,250,000 from leather, $1,000,000 from steam engines,
and various other lesser amounts.

The Fortieth Congress continued the work of reduc-
ing the "war taxes ^' with great alacrity. A tax on raw
cotton had been levied in 1868 and was continued
until 1868, the Government realizing from it about
$68,000,000. This was repealed, and a further reduc-
tion of internal revenue was made by the acts of March
31, and July 80, 1868. Relief was given to manu-
facturers by the abolition of what was known as ^ the
five per. cent tax '' on a variety of products, the revenue
from which was estimated at $45,000,000.

OF HENBY OLAT AND SINCE. 86

The financial legislation of the time was comprehen-
sive and able. Within four years after the close of
the Civil War the National debt was reduced nearly
$300,000,000, and steps were taken looking to its
speedy payment and extinction, instead of perpetuation,
as in the case of the great nations of Europe. This
vrs8 done, too, notwithstanding a steady and enormous
reduction of the internal revenue, which, in 1869, was
$151,000,000 less than in 1866. Our protective system
remidned unimpaired and was fulfilling every expecta*
tion of its friends although the free traders were
already beginning to assault it.

The Republican National Convention of 1868 declared
that ^'it is due to the labor of the Nation that
taxation should be equalized and reduced as rapidly
as the National faith will permit" The Democratic
National Convention, on the other hand, declared, with
traditional reverence, in favor of ^' a tariff for revenue
upon foreign imports ; ^' and then added the anomalous
provision, ^^and such equal taxation under the internal
revenue laws as will, without impairing the revenue^
impose the least burden upon and best promote and
encourage the great industrial interests of the country."
So far as this could be construed into any definite
policy it was a preference for internal taxation instead
of customs dues. To this the Bepublicans of the
country were decidedly opposed.

At the first session of the Forty-first Congress, on
March 29, 1869, Hon. George W. Morgan, of Ohio, offered
a resolution instructing the Ways and Means Committee
of the House to report a bill **to exempt salt, tea,
coffee, sugar, matches, and tobacco from every species

S6 THE TABIEF IN THE DAYS

of taxation for Federal purposes." Mr. Hooper, of
Massacliasetts, moved that it be laid on the table,
which was agreed to— yeas, 104; nays, 40. The
affirmative vote was exclusively Republican, and the
negative exclusively Democratic, except one.

At the second session of this Congress, on January
31, 1870, Hon. Samuel S. Marshall, of Illinois, offered a
resolution in the House declaring that ^Hhe Constitution
does not include or embrace any power to levy duties
for any purpose other than the collection of revenue,
and that a tariff levied for any purpose other than
revenue is unjust to the body of the American people."
On motion of Mr. Kelsey, of New York, the resolution
was laid on the table — ^yeas, 90; nays, 77. The affirmative
vote was entirely by Republicans ; the negative, Demo-
crats 52, Republicans 25.

On March 14th, Mr. Marshall again offered a reso-
lution declaring ^Hhat no duty should be imposed on
any article above the lowest rate which will yield the
largest amount of revenue." It was referred to the
Committee on Ways and Means.

On June 6th, Hon. Hamilton Ward, of New York,
submitted a resolution directing the Committee on
Ways and Means ^^to report a bill abolishing the tariff
on coaL" This was adopted by a vote of 112 to 78,
seventy-six Republicans and thirty-six Democrats voting
in the affirmative, and sixty-one Republicans and
seventeen Democrats in the negative.

On June 27th, Hon. Henry A. Reeves, of New York,
moved that the Committee be instructed to report a
bill ^^reducing the present duties on all classes of salt
fifty per cent." His resolution was adopted by a vote

OF HEKBT CLAT AND 8IKGB. 17

of 110 to 49 ; fifty-eeven Bepublicans and forty-three
Democrats in the affirmative, and forty-nine Bepublicans
in the negative.

On July 14, 1870, President Grant approved the gen-
eral tariff act which was passed by Congress at this ses-
sion. It reduced the revenue from customs about $27,-
000,000, and from internal revenue some $53,000,000,
according to the estimate of Hon. Robert G. Schenck, of
Ohio, then Chairman of the Ways and Means Coounittee
of the House, and one of the most capable and popular
leaders in Congress. To his industry, ability and elo-
quence the country is especially indebted for the main-
tenance of our pix>tective system. Upon few statesmen
of the period devolved such weighty responsibilities^
cheerfully and creditably borne in every emergency.
The bill passed the House, on June 6th, by a vote of
152 to 35, fifteen Democrats voting in the affirmative,
and two Bepublicans in the negative. It passed the
Senate, as amended, on July 5th, yeas, 48 ; nays, 6 ; two
Democrats voted for the bill, and one Republican
against it The House concurred in the Senate amend-
ments to abolish idl special taxes (such as the tax on
passports) and fix the income tax at two-and-a-half per
cent The bill then went to a Conference Conunittee
consisting of Senators Sherman, of Ohio, Morrill, of
Vermont, and Hamilton, of Maryland, and Representa-
tives Schenck, of Ohio, Kelley, of Pennsylvania, and
James Brooks, of New York. Their report was sub*
mitted on July 18th, adopted by the Senate without
division, and by the House by a vote of 144 to 49.

The duties on tea, coffee and sugar, and some articles
of steel and iron were reduced, but neither salt nor coal

38 THE TABIFF IK THE DATS

was put on the free list The country did not accept
the bill without misgivings that Congress, in its haste
to reduce taxation, had failed to give sufficient regard
to the prospective needs of the Government.

President Grant, with the common sense for which
he was proverbial, promptly announced his opposition
to all covert attacks upon our protective system. Dis-
cussing the insidious pleas for *' revenue reform," which
free traders were making, in his annual message to
Congress, December 5, 1870, he said :

'^ If it (revenue reform) implies a collection of all the
revenue for the support of the Government, for the
payment of principal and interest of the public debt^
pensions, etc., by directly taxing the people, then I am
against revenue reform, and confidently believe the
people are with me. If it means failure to provide the
necessary means to defray all the expenses of the Govem-
menty and thereby the repudiation of the public debt^
and of pensions, then I am still more opposed to any
such kind of revenue reform. Revenue reform has not
been defined by any of its advocates, to my knowledge,
but seems to be accepted as something which is to
supply every man's wants without any cost or effort on
his part. A true revenue reform can not be made in a
day, but it must be the the work of National legislation,
and of time. As soon as the revenue can be dispensed
with, all duty should be removed from coffee, tea and
other articles of universal use not produced by our-
selves. The necessities of the country compel us to col-
lect revenue from our imports. An army of assessors
and collectors is not a pleasant sight to the citizen, but
that, or a tariff for revenue is necessary. Such a tariff,

OF HENBY CLAY AND SINCE. 99

80 far as it acts as an encouragement to home produc-
tion, affords employment to labor at living wages^ in
contrast to the pauper labor of the Old World, and
also in the development of home resources.''

Hon. William D. Kelley, of Pennsylvania, offered a
resolution in the House, on December 12, 1870, de-
claring that ^^the true principle of revenue reform
points to the abolition of the internal revenue system
and retention only of taxes on distilled spirits, tobacco,
and malt liquors, so long as the legitimate expenses of
the Government require the collection of any sum from
internal taxes." He moved a suspension of the rules^
which was agreed to, and the resolution was adopted
almost unanimously — ^yeas, 168 ; nays, 6.

In his third annual message to Congress (December
4, 1871), President Grant again discussed the propriety
of a revision of the tariff. In this he said :

'^The prosperity and greatness of a nation is to be
found in the elevation and education of its laborers.

In readjusting the tariff I suggest that a

careful estimate be made of the amount of surplus
revenue collected under the present laws, after pro-
viding for the current expenses of the Government, the
interest account, and a sinking fund, and this surplus
be reduced in such a manner as to afford the greatest
relief to the greatest number. There are many articles
not produced at home, but which may enter largely
into general consimiption through articles which are
manufactured at home, such as medicines compounded,
etc., from which very little revenue is derived, but
which enter into general use. All such articles, I rec-
ommend to be placed on the ^^free list." Should a

40 THE TARIFF IN THE DAYS

farther redaction prove advisable, I woald then recom-
mend that it be made apon those articles which can
best bear it without disturbing home production or
reducing the wages of American labor."

On March 18, 1871, inthe Forty-second Congress, at
its first session, Hon. Samuel J. Randall, of Pennsylvania,
who was afterwards to figure so prominently in tarilE
legislation, moved to suspend the rules and put upon its
passage a bill to comply with the recommendations of
President Grant by placing tea and coffee on the free
list This was agreed to, and the bill passed — ^yeas,
140 ; nays, 48, nine Democrats and thirty-nine Repub-
licans voting in the n^ative. The Senate did not act
on this bill until more than a year later, when, on April
80^ 1872, Mr. Scott, of Pennsylvania, called it up, and
submitted an amendment to the effect that ^' all tea
and coffee in public stores or bonded warehouses on
July Ist should be free of duty, and that a rebate
should be granted on that which had previously paid
a duty." This was agreed to, but amendments to
further extend the free list^ so as to include salt^ and
other articles, were defeated. The bill was then passed
— ^yeas, 39 ; nays, 10, four Democrats and six Repub-
licans voting in the negative. The Senate amendments
were concurred in by the House, and the act was
approved by President Grant on May 1st The re-
duction in revenue by it amounted to $20,000,000 per
annum.

The temper of the times suggested many experiments.
On March 18, 1871, Hon. John R Famsworth, of Illinois,
moved to suspend the rules of the House and pass a
bill providing that ^ no tax or duty shall be levied or

OF HENBT CLAT AND 8IKCR 41

collected upon foreign coaL'' This was agreed to, and
the bill was passed — ^yeas, 180; nays, 57. Twelve
Democrats voted in the negative. The Senate took no
action on the bill.

On the following day, Hon. Eugene Hale, of Maine,
moved to suspend the rules, and pass a bill ^ placing
Bait on the free list.'^ This was agreed to, and the bill
was passed — ^yeas, 147; nays, 46. Seven Democrats
and thiriy-nine Republicans voted in the negative. The
Senate did not consider the bill

On March 27th, Hon. Ellery A, Hibbard, of New
Hampshire, offered a resolution, which was referred to
the Committee on Ways and Means, vrithout contest,
declaring that ^ the tariff should be so reformed as to be
a tax for revenue only, and not for the protection of
class interests at the general expense.^ On the same day,
Hon. Hosea W. Parker, of the same State, offered a
resolution declaring it the sense of the House '^ that the
tariff should be so reformed as to be a tax for revenue
only.^ This, too, was referred to the Committee on
Ways and Means — ^yeas, 98; nays, 18 — ^a strict party
vote, except seven Democrats voted for the reference,
and five Republicans against it.

On April 10, 1871, Hon. William D. Kelley, as in the
previous Congress, offered a resolution declaring that
^ the true principle of revenue reform points to the abo-
lition of the internal revenue system.'' It was adopted
—yeas, ISO ; nays, 21, eight Republicans voting in the
native.

On February 19, 1872, Hon. Eugene Hale moved to
sospend the rules and pass a bill placing coal and salt
on the free list, but the motion did not receive the

4a THE TABIFF IN THE DATS

necessary two-thirds vote — ^yeas^ 102; nays, 86. Six-
teen Democrats voted against, and thirty-seven Repub-
licans for suspending the rules.

On February 26th, Hon. Samuel S. Cox, of New
York, moved to suspend the rules and pass a bill ^'re-
ducing the tariff on pig-iron to five dollars per ton, or
less," but the motion was lost — ^yeas, 74 ; nays, 99. AH
the affirmative votes but eleven were cast by Democrats
and all the n^ative but eleven by Republicans.

At this session, under the act of March 5th, Congress
repealed all internal taxes on canned meats, fish, fruits,
and vegetables. By the general tariff act of June 6,
1872, also passed at this session, many changes were
made in existing duties. A reduction of ten per cent, was
made in the duties on all importations of cotton, wool»
iron, steel, paper, straw, rubber, glass and leather, with
numerous specific changes, and a large addition to the
free list This bill passed the House on May 20th —
yeas, 149 ; nays, 61 — ^and the Senate, as amended, on
May 81st, with but three dissenting votes, all Repub-
licans. The report of the Committee of Conference was
quickly agreed to, and the bill promptly signed by the
Pi'esident. Under these acts, and that of May 1st, the
reduction in internal taxes was about $21,131,000, and
the decrease in customs about $44,000,000.

The Liberal Republican platform of 1872 subse-
quently adopted by the Democratic National Conven-
tion declared : ^^ That recognizing that there are in our
midst honest but irreconcilable differences of opinion
vrith regard to the respective systems of protection and
free trade, we remit the discussion of the subject to the
people in their Congressional districts, and the decisions

OF HENBT CLAT AND SINGE. 43

of Congress thereon, wholly free from ezecntive inter-
ference, or dictation.'^

The Republican National Convention met the issue
more boldly. It declared : ^ That revenue, except so
much as may be derived from a tax upon tobacco and
liquor, should be raised by duties upon importations,
the details of which should be so adjusted as to aid in
securing I'emunerative wages to labor, and in promoting
the industries, prosperity, and growth of the whole coun-
try. '^ Upon this platform the Republicans won an unpre-
cedented victory, and carried the Forty-third Congress
by an overwhelming majority.

In his fifth annual message to Congress, on December
1, 1878, President Grant devoted considerable attention
to the consideration of our National finances. His
observations, in part, were as follows:

" The receipts of the Government from all sources for
the last fiscal year were $833,738,204, and the expendi*
tares on all accounts $290,845,245, thus showing an
excess of receipts over expenditures of $48,398,959.
Bat it is not probable that this favorable exhibit will
be shown for the present fiscal year. Indeed, it is very
doubtful whether, except with great economy on the
part of Congress in making appropriations and the same
economy in administering the various departments of
Government, the revenue will not fall short of meet-
ing actual expenses, including interest on the public
debt.

^^The revenues have materially fallen off for the first
five months of the present fiscal year from what they
were expected to produce, owing to the general panic
now prevailing, which commenced about the middle of

44 THB TABIFF IK THE DATS

September last The fall effect of this disaster, if it
should not prove a '^blessing in disguise/' is yet to be
demonstrated. In either event it is your duty to heed
the lesson, and to provide by wise and well considered
legislation, as far as it lies in your power, against its
recurrence, and to take advantage of all benefits that
may have accrued. My own judgment is that, however
much individuals may have suffered, one long step has
been taken toward specie payment, that we can never
have permanent prosperity until a spede basis is reached,
and that a specie basis can not be reached and main-
tained until our exports, exclusive of gold, pay for our
imports, interest due abroad, and other specie obliga^
tions, or so nearly so as to leave an appreciable accum*
ulation of the precious metals in the country from the
products of our mines. ... In further connection with
the Treasury Department I would recommend a revision
and codification of the tariff laws, and the opening of
more mints for coining money, with authority to coin
for such nations as may apply. "

In the House of Representatives, on January 12, 1874,
Mr. Kelley, of Pennsylvania, moved to suspend the
rules and adopt a resolution declaring ^^ that the taxes
which now burden the people should not be increased ;
but the support of the Grovemment during the present
temporary paralysis in the industries of the country
should be met by a temporary loan or loans." The
motion was disagreed to, two-thirds not voting in the
affirmative — yeas, 154 ; nays, 88. Fifty-six Democrats
and ninety-eight Republicans voted to suspend the
rules ; and twenty Democrats and sixty-three Republi*
cans against it.

OF HENBT CLAY AND SINGE. 46

On the same day, Hon. William S. Holman, 6f
Indiana, offered the following resolution:

^ Heaohwd, Tliat in the judgment of this House there
is no necessity for increased taxation or for an increase
of the public debt by a further loan if there shall be
severe economy in the public expenditures ; and in view
of the condition of the National finances this House
will reduce the appropriations and public expenditures
to the lowest point consistent with a proper adminis-
tration of public affairs.^'

The rules were suspended and it was adopted by
a vote of two hundred and twenty-two to three.

Hon* Joseph R Hawley, of Connecticut, offered a
fitting supplement to this resolution which was also
adopted. It declared that —

^The expenditures of the Nation can and should be
so reduced and regulated that they can be met by the
existing taxes, and in no event should there be an
increase of either interest-bearing or non-interest-bear-
ing obligations of the Government"

These resolutions had ref erence, of course, to the so-
called ^ panic of 1873," and the financial depression
which followed. The causes that produced this
financial disturbance were not connected with our
revenue systeuL They were the necessary and
logical effects of the war, and the long period of
speculation and inflation attendant upon it. Wise
financiers foresaw and predicted it, and had the
contraction policy been adopted by Congress, the crash
would have been precipitated upon the country at an
earlier day and with greater severity. The protective
policy retarded and mitigated our monetary evils, and

46 THE TABIFF IN THE DATS

there were fewer suspensions of factories, lighter re-
dactions in wages, less distress on the farm, and a
smaller proportionate shrinkage of values, the country
over, than had occurred in any of our previous great
financial depressions. Moreover, the country emerged
from it more promptly, and in a more prosperous con-
dition, than in any other panic. Depreciation in values
and failures in business were unavoidable, but the
expansion and development which followed the resump-
tion of specie payment^ and the close of the panic,
were on a surer and safer basis than ever before had
been attained in the fiscal history of the United States.

By the acts of May 9, and June 22, 1874, further
reductions and modifications in customs duties were
made, amounting in the aggregate to from $6,000,000
to $10,000,000. The passage of these laws was un-
timely and they were evidently not satisfactory, if we
may judge from President Grant's sixth annual message
to Congress, on December 7, 1874. In this he said :

^^ At the last session of Congress a very considerable
reduction was made in the rates of taxation and in the
number of articles submitted to taxation. The question
may well be asked whether or not, in some instances, un-
wisely. In connection with this subject, too, I venture
the opinion that the means of collecting the revenue,
especially from imports, have been so embarrassed by
legislation, as to make it questionable whether or not
laige amounts are not lost by failure to collect, to the
direct loss of the Treasury, and to the prejudice of the
interests of honest importers and taxpayers. ''

In compliance with these su^estions, Congress, by
the acts of February 8, and March 3, 1875, increased the

OF HENBY CLAY AND BINGE. 47

taxes on liquors and tobacco, and the duties on sugar
and molasses. The ten per cent decrease of duties,
provided by the act of June 6, 1872, was repealed.

The House of Representatives in the Forty-fourth
Congress for the first time since the war was strongly
Democratic, containing 168 Democrats in a total mem-
bership of 293. It organized by electing Hon. Michael
G. Kerr, of Indiana, Speaker, who appointed Col.
William R Morrison, of Illinois^ Chairman of the
Ways and Means Committee. Mr. Kerr's health was so
poor, however, that he died a few days after the adjourn-
ment of the first session, and was succeeded as Speaker
by Hon. Samuel J. Bandall, of Pennsylvania. The
Senate remained Republican by forty-two to thirty-two.
To this Congress, President Grant addressed his
seventh annual message, December 7, 1876. Speaking
of the tariff he said :

^One measure for increasing the revenue — and the
only one I think of — ^is the restoration of the duty on tea
and coffee. These duties would add probably $18,000-
000 to the present amount received from imports and
would in no way increase the price paid for these
articles by the consumers. These articles are the pro-
ducts of countries collecting revenue from exports, and
as we, their largest consumers, reduce the duties, they
proportionately increase them. With this addition to
the revenue, many duties now collected, and which give
but an insignificant return for the cost of collection,
might be remitted, and to the direct advantage of con-
sumers at home.^'

At the first session of this Congress, on January 81,
1876, Mr. Morrison, of Illinois, introduced a bill for the

48 THE TABIFF IN THE DAYS

revision of the tariff. It reduced the rates on almost
the entire dutiable list except cigars (on which the duty
was increased) and reimposed a duty upon tea and cof-
fee. The bill was referred to the Committee on Ways and
Means, and on May 25th, the House, in Committee of the
Whole, began its discussion. Mr. Morrison opened the
debate, which continued at intervals until June 2d| when
it was postponed to the next session, but the bill never
came to a direct vote at any stage of the proceedings.

On May 29th, Hon. Charles H. Adams, of New York,
offered a resolution, declaring it the judgment of
the House 'Hhat legislation affecting the tariff is at
this time inexpedient'* The main question was ordered,
but Mr. Morrison secured a reconsideration by a vote
of 120 to 94, and had the resolution referred to the
Committee on Ways and Means. Eight Republi-
cans and Independents voted with the Democrats for
the reference, and nineteen Democrats and Independ-
ents with the Republicans against it. No tariff
legislation was further attempted during the session.

The tariff was a platform issue of the Presidential
campaign of 1876, but received comparatively little
attention from the press or the masses of the voters of
either party. At the Republican National Convention
in Cincinnati, on June 14th, it was unanimously resolved:

^^ That the revenue necessary for current expenditures,
and the obligations of the public debt^ must be largely
derived from duties upon importations, which, so far as
possible, should be adjusted to promote the interests of
American labor and advance the prosperity of the whole
country.''

At the Democratic National Convention in St Louis,

OF HENBY CLAY AND SINGE. 49

Jane 27th, the platform was adopted by a vote of 661
to 83. The eleventh plank of this lengthy ^^ deolaiation
of principles '' is as follows:

" We denounce the present tariff, levied upon nearly
4,000 articles^ as a masterpiece of injustice, inequality,
and false pretence. It yields a dwindling, not a yearly
rising, revenua It has impoverished many industries
to subsidize a few. It prohibits imports that might
purchase the products of American labor. It has de-
graded American commerce from the first to an inferior
rank on the high seas. It has cut down the sales of
American manufacturers at home and abroad, and
depleted the returns of American agriculture— an in-
dustry followed by half our people. It costs the people
five times more than it produces to the Treasury,
obstructs the processes of production, and wastes the
fruits of labor. It promotes fraud, fosters smuggling,
enriches dishonest officials, and bankrupts honest mer-
chants. We demand that all custom-house ta2cation
shall be only for revenua"

The House of Bepresentatives of the Forty-fifth Con-
gress, elected in 1876, was again Democratic, the
majority party electing 158 of the 298 members. The
Senate was Republican by the narrow margin of two
votes — ^Republicans, 89 ; Democrats, 86 ; Independents,
1. Hon. Samuel J. Randall was re-elected Speaker of
the House, and by his appointment Hon. Fernando
Wood, of New York, became Chairman of the Ways
and Means Committee.

On December 1, 1877, at the very beginning of the
session, Hon. Roger Q. Mills, of Texas, moved to sus-
pwd the rules and adopt a resolution ^^ instructing the

60 THE TARIFF IN THE DATS

Committee on Ways and Means to so revise the tariff as
to make it purely and solely a tariff for revenue, and
not for protecting one class of citizens by plundering
another." The motion was disagreed to— yeas, 67, all
. Democrats but six ; nays, 76, all Republicans but ten.

Nevertheless, the Committee on Ways and Means
promptly reported a tariff bill materially deducing ex-
isting duties, and especially crippling the steel and iron,
glass and pottery industries. On March 28, 1878, Mr.
Wood moved that his bill be made the special order for
April 4th, which was objected to, but the motion pre-
vailed by a vote of 187 to 114 — ^fifteen Republicans
voting in the affirmative and ten Democrats in the nega-
tive. The discussions in the Committee of the Whole
were decidedly adverse to the bilL It was shown that
there was no popular demand for such le^lation, but
on the contrary that the workingmen of the country by
the thousands had not only remonstrated against the
pending measure, but insisted rather on an increase of
the dutiea There was no plethora in the revenue nor
surplus in the Treasury justifying its passaga Indeed,
the experts of the Treasury estimated that the revenue
to be derived under the bill, on the basis of the importa^
tions of 1877, would be insufficient to support the Gov-
ernment, and result in a deficiency of at least $9,000,000
annually. The Committee of the Whole House there-
fore agreed to recommend the defeat of the bill. The
question of ^striking out the enacting clause'' came to a
vote in the House on June 5th and the recommendation
of the Committee was sustained — ^yeas, 184 ; nays, 120.
Nineteen Democrats voted in the affirmative and six
Republicans in the negative, while fourteen Republicans

OF HENBT CLAY AND SINCE. 51

and twenty-two Democrats did not vote. Thus ended
anotlier assault on our protective system, but, as Mr.
W€K>d declared, in anticipation of an adverse result, '^ the
fight had only just begun.'^

In the election of 1878 the Democrats carried the

House of Representatives in the Forty-sixth Congress,

and the Senate was also Democratic, that party having

succeeded in electing forty-two of the seventy-six meni-

bera In accordance with the call of President Hayes,

Congress convened in special session on March 18, 1879.

Mr. Randall was again elected Speaker and Mr. Wood

re-appointed Chairman of the Committee on Ways and

Means, with such prominent free-trade ^^ tariff reformers ^

as Messrs.' Tucker, of Virginia, Morrison, of Illinois^

Ifills, of Texas, and Carlisle, of Kentucky, as his asso-

ciate&

On June 80, 1879, Hon. James W. Covert, of New
York, moved to suspend the rules of the House and
pass a bill ^ to put salts of quinine on the free lisf
There was little opposition to the motion, and the bill
passed by a vote of 126 to 83. It passed the Senate, on
July 1st, without division, and was promptly approved
by the President.

In tbe House, on January 12, 1880, Hon. William H.
Hatch, of Missouri, moved to suspend the rules and pass
a bill providing that ^' no duty shall be levied or col-
lected, directly or indirectly, on the importation of salt,''
but it was disagreed to — ^yeas, 115 ; nays, 116. Sixteen
Republicans voted in the affirmative, and fifteen Demo-
crats in the negative.

On March 1st, Hon. William M. Lowe, of Alabama,
introduced a bill to provide for refunding the cotton tax.

62 THE TABIFF IN THE DAYS

eollected daring the war^ to the States fix>in which it
was collected. It was referred to the Committee on
Ways and Means— yeas, 136 (Republicans 103, Demo-
crats and Nationalists 33) ; nays, 92, (Democrats 89,
Nationalists 3) — and was never subsequently re-
ported.

On March 8th, Hon. William J. Samford, of Alabama,
introduced two bills affecting the tariff. The first pro-
posed a reduction of fifty per cent, on merchandise com-
posed of " hemp, metals, wool, wood and cotton ; " the
second, the repeal of all duties on ^'printing-type and pa-
per, and the materials entering into their composition.^'
He asked their reference to the Committee on Revision of
Laws, but this was disagreed to, and the bills were sent
to the Committee on Ways and Means, by the test vote
of 114 to 87. One hundred and seven Republicans and
thirty-seven Democrats voted for the latter reference ;
and seven Republicans and eighty Democrats against it
On the same day Mi\ Hatch's " free salt bill '* was re-
ferred to the Ways and Means Committee, the Republi-
cans generally favoring and the Democrats opposing the
reference.

On March 22nd, Hon. Richard W. Townshend, of
Illinois, introduced a bill to abolish ^^ the duty on salt,
printing-type, printing-paper, and the chemicals and
materials used in the manufacture of printing-paper,''
and secured its reference to the Committee on Revision
of Laws. On the next day Genei-al Garfield moved " to
amend the journal so as to refer it to the Ways and
Means Committee." A bitter parliamentary fight en-
sued, lasting several days, in which the opponents of
the bill were finally successful, the reference to the

OF HENBY CLAT AND BINGE. 63

Ways and Means Committee Wng ordered by a vote
of 142 to 90, All the negative votes were cast by
Democrats, with the exception of three Nationalists.

On April Sth, Mr. Townshend moved to suspend the
roles and discharge the Committee on Ways and Means
from the further consideration of this bill. This was
disagreed to by a vote of 112 to 80.

On May 11th, Mr. Tucker, from the Ways and
Means Committee, reported a bill '^to regulate the
duties on hoop, band, and scroll iron/' which, with the
accompanying report, was referred to the Committee of
the Whole House. Mr. Garfield, of Ohio, submitted a
minority report, signed by himself and the other
Eepublican members of the Committee. No other
action was taken upon the measure.

Mr. Tucker reported a second bill " to regulate the
customs duties on sugar," and it, too, was referred to
the Committee of the Whole, without any further
action by the House. He also reported a third bill,
commonly known as '^the general tariff bill," but
styled by the Committee as a bill '^ to regulate the cus-
toms duties on certain articles therein named.'' On
Hay .24th, Mr. Garfield submitted an exhaustive minor-
ity report embracing the views of himself and col-
leagues not only upon ** the Tucker bill," but upon the
tariff in general It was widely circulated in the
National campaign of that year as a campaign docu-
ment — ^peculiar interest attaching to its author, then
the Republican candidate for the Presidency.

On June 8th, Mr. Tucker reported a House joint res-
olution from the Committee on Ways and Means rela-
tive to the duty on hoop-iron, which after some objec-

64 THE TABIFF IK THE DATS

tion was adopted on a viva voce vote. It was reported,
on June 10th, by the Finance Committee of the Senate,
and adopted by that body, again without division, aad
by the approval of President Hayes had the force and
effect of law.

Fending the resolution for final adjournment, Mr.
Mills moved that it be recommended to the Ways and
Means Committee with instructions to report a bill
providing for the ^^ free importation of salt and printing-
paper before they report a resolution for adjournment."
This was disagreed to — ^yeas, 90, all Democrats but
eleven; nays 116, all Republicans but thirty-one.

The discussions of the Senate were principally over
the bill introduced by Hon. William W. Eaton, of
Connecticut, '^ to provide for the appointment of a Com-
mission to investigate the tariff, a final report to be
made in January, 1881.'^ This was passed on June 8,
1880, by a vote of thirty-one to fifteen. The affirmatire
vote was cast by sixteen Democrats and fifteen Repub-
licans; the n^ative entirely by Democrats. The bill
was not considered by the House.

At the third session of this Congress, on December 6,
1880, Hon. Frank H. Hurd, of Ohio, offered a Hpuse
joint resolution proposing, to the end that the tariff
should be for revenue only, the following changes :

1. ^^ Upon all dutiable articles producing little or no
revenue to the Government the duty should be returned
to a revenue basis, or they should be placed on the free
list''

2. " The duty on tea and coffee should be restored."
The resolution was referred to the Ways and Means

Committee, but although subsequently supported by

OF HENBY CLAY AND SINCE. 66

Mr. Hard in a speech to the House no vote was taken
upon it

On December 21sty Hon. Hiram Price, of Iowa,
moved to suspend the rules of the House and pass a
bill repealing the law ^^ requiring stamps on bank
checks.^ The motion was lost — ^yeas 129, nays 68, not
the requisite two-thirds in the affirmative. Seven
Bepublicans voted with the Democrats in the n^ative.*

Thus after six years' agitation the situation as to the
tariff was practically unchanged. By the acts of June
22, 1874, of February 8, and March 8, 1875, of July 1,

1879, and June 14, 1880, the Income Tax had been
abolished, the Match Tax repealed, and various changes
made in the assessment and collection of internal
revenue, but while this was true the aggregate receipts
from customs and internal revenue were practically the
the same— $265,618,000, in 1874, and $810,581,000, in

1880. Meanwhile the country amid unexampled embar-
rassments had attained a prosperity greater than it had
ever before enjoyed. So great was the prosperity that
the Republican party, at its National Convention at
Chicago, in June, 1880, could truthfully congratulate
the people upon the marvelous success of its fiscal
policy. Never before could any political organization,
appealing to the record, safely assert that its achieve-
ments included such great events as the following,
which were enumerated by the platform, subsequently
endorsed by the country :

• Upon tlie'death of Hon. Fernando Wood, Febnuuy 14, 1881, Mr.
Tucker became Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee. Hon.
James A. Qarfleld, of Ohio, having been elected to the Presidency, and
resigned from the House, Mr. McEinlej, of the same State, succeeded him
u a member of this Committee in December, 1880.

56

THE TABIFF IN THE DATS

^ It (the Repablican party) has raised the valae of
our paper currency from thirty-eight per cent to the
par of gold. It has restored, upon a solid basis^ pay-
ment in coin for all the National obligations, and has
given us a currency absolutely good and equal in every
part of our extended country. It has lifted the credit
of the Nation from the point where six per cent bonds
sold at eighty-six to that where four per cent bonds
are eagerly sought at a premium. Under its administrar
tion railways have increased from 81,000 miles in 1860,
to more than 82,000 miles in 1879. Our foreign trade
has increased from $700,000,000 to $1,160,000,000 in
the same time ; and our exports, which were $20,000,-
000 less than our imports in 1860 were $264,000,000
more than our imports in 1879. Without resorting
to loans, it has, since the war closed, defrayed the ordi-
nary expenses of the Government, beside the accruing
interest on the public debt, and disbursed annually
over $80,000,000 for soldiers' pensions. It has paid
$888,000,000 of the public debt, and, by refunding the
balance at lower rates, has reduced the annual interest
charge from nearly $161,000,000 to less than $89,000,-
000.''

In view of these facts the Republican Convention
declared ^that the reviving industries should be fur-
ther promoted, and that the commerce, already so
great, should be steadily encouraged.'' It also resolved:
i^We reaffirm the belief, avowed in 1876, that the
m l^ylghdm the [>iirpose of revenue should so dis-

nn&^ ^Wivor American labor."

ic National Convention, at Cincinnati,
ed in fevor of " a tariff for revenue

OF HBNBY OLAT AND SINCE. 57

ODfy ; ^ and then, as if in doubt as to how its position
would be construed, added this further declaration:
^The Democratic party is a friend of labor and the
laboring man, and pledges itself to protect him alike
against the cormorants and the communa'*

The tariff issue was destined to receive much atten-
tion in the ensuing campaign. After the Republican
reverse in Maine in September, it was evident that
Tudess the States of Indiana and Ohio holding elec-
tions in October could be carried, defeat in the Nation
in November was certain. The Democratic declaration
in favor of ^a tariff for revenue only " was turned with
tremendous force against that party, and proved of the
greatest advantage in carrying both these States for the
fiepublican ticket. The visit of G-eneral Grant and
Senator Conkling to Ohio and Indiana was no more
effective than the brilliant campaign of Mr. Blaine^
who devoted his efforts to a striking and thorough dis-
cussion of the tariff issue, of which he was so truly
''prophet and master.'' In the East, the result in New
York hinged largely upon its consideration and the
workingmen of the industrial centers were rallied to
the standard of protection in immense and decisive
numbers. Indeed, that alone saved the State, and
secured the election of the Republican National ticket.

The House of Representatives of the Forty-seventh
Congress, elected in 1880, was Republican by seven
majority. It organized by electing Hon. Joseph War-
^n Keifer, of Ohio, Speaker, who appointed Hon.
William D. Kelley, Chairman of the Ways and Means
Committee. Neither party had a majority in the
Senate, which consisted of thirty-seven Republicans,

68 THE TARIFF IN THE DATS

ihirty-sevea Democrats, one Independent and one Bead-
joBter. Hon. David Davis^ of Illinois, was elected
President pro tern.

President Arthur, in his first annual message, Decem-
ber 6, 1881, devoted a passage to the tari£E. He said:

^^The tariff laws also need revision, but, that a due
regard may be paid to the conflicting interests of our
citizens, important changes should be made with cau-
tion. If a careful revision can not be made at this
session, a Gonmiission, such as was lately approved by
the Senate, and is now recommended by the Secretary
of the Treasury, would doubtless lighten the labors of
Congress whenever this subject is brought to its con-
sideration."

On March 8, 1882, Hon. John A. Kasson, of Iowa,
called up the bill, reported by him for the Goiomittee
on Ways and Mean^ to create a Tariff Commission
of nine members, to be appointed by the President
Objections were made, and it was held not to have
precedence, although on March 20th • Mr. Kelley suc-
ceeded in having it made a special order, and it was
thereafter the subject of much debate. On May 6th
Mr. Mills moved that it be recommitted to the Ways
and Means Committee ^^ to report within thirty days a
bill framed in compliance with the following instruc-
tions:

^^1. That no more money should be collected than
is necessary for the wants of the Government, econom-
ically administered. 2. That no duty be imposed on
any article above the lowest rate that will yield the
largest amount of revenue. 3. That below such rate
discrimination may be made descending in the scale of

OF HEKBT CLAY AND SINCE. 59

duties, or for imperative reasons the article may be
placed on the list of those free from all duty. 4. That
the mayimnm revenue duty should be imposed on lux-
uries. 6. That all specific duties should be abolished
and ad valorem duties substituted in their place, care
being taken to guard against fraudulent invoices and
undervaluation, and to assess the duty upon the actual
market value. 6. That the duty should be so imposed
as to operate as equally as possible throughout the
Union, diBcriminating neither for nor against any class
or section.''

This resolution embraced the creed of Mr. Mills and hia
fellow '^tarifE-reformers,'' both in Congress and through-
out the country, but it is safe to say no tariff bill ever
wa^ or could be drawn to meet his conditiona The House
defeated the motion to reoonmiit by the vote, yeas, 76 —
all Democrats ; nays^ 162 — all Republicans but twenty-
nine, six Nationalists and twenty-three Democrats.

The bill to create the Commission was then passed
by a similar vote — ^yeas, 161 ; nays, 83. Seven Re-
publicans voted with the Democrats in the negative,
and twenty-six Democrats and five Nationalists with
the Republicans in the affirmative.

The Senate passed this bill with but little opposition.
A similar measure, by Mr. Morrill, had, in fact, been
introduced in the Senate on December 6, 1881, and
passed on March 28, 1882, by a vote of 88 to 16. The
House bill was passed on May 9th — yeas, 86, all Re-
publicans but six; nays 19, all Democrats but two.
It was approved by President Arthur on May 16th,
and the following gentlemen were appointed by him
to constitute the Tariff Commission, all of whom were

60 THE TABIFF IK THE DAYS

promptly confirmed by the Senate: John L. Hay^ of
MassachusettSy Chairman ; Henry W. Oliver, Jr., of Penn-
sylvania; Austin M. Garland, of Illinois; Jacob A.
Ambler, of Ohio ; Robert P. Porter, of the District of
Columbia ; John W, H. Underwood, of Georgia ; Dun-
can F. Kenner, of Louisiana ; Alexander R. Boteler, of
West Virginia, and William H. McMahon, of New York.

At this session, on April Srd, the House, under the
leadership of Hon« Mark H. Dunnell, of Minnesota,
passed, without division, a bill to amend the laws relat-
ing ^^to the entry of spirits in distilleries and ware-
houses, and their withdrawal therefrom.'^ A substitute
was reported, by the Committee on Finance, in the
Senate, but this was indefinitely postponed by a vote of
thirty-two to twenty.

On June 6th Hon. Phillip B. Thompson, of Ken-
tucky, moved to suspend the rules of the House and
pass a bill ^^to abolish the duty on trace-chains," but
the motion was lost — ^yeas, 78; nays, 108. On the
same day Mr. Kelley attempted to secure a suspension
and the passage of a bill correcting an error in the
duties on ready-made clothing and knit goods, affecting
the tariff on wool and sUk. His motion, too, was lost —
yeas, 185; nays, 70 — ^not two-thirds in the affirmative.

The most important measure before Congress at this
session, in the light of subsequent events, however, was
a bill to reduce internal revenue taxation, which was
passed in the House on June 27th, by a vote of 127 to
80. Twenty-two Democrats united with the Repub-
licans in support of this measure, and fifteen Repub-
licans voted with the Democrats against it. In the
Senate the bill was reported, on July 6th, but was

OF HENBY CLAY AND SINGE. 61

Fecommitted to the Finance Committee, and when
reported by Mr. Morrill^ on July 12thy contained
numerous important amendments. Its title was changed
to ^'an act to reduce taxation/' and the changes included
a revision of tariff schedules as well as internal taxes.
It was debated at length, from July 19th to 24th, when
the Senate voted — ^by 33 to 26 — ^to take up the Naval
Appropriation Bill, and so it went over until the next
session. On July 3 1st, pending consideration of the
Naval Bill, Mr. Vance, of North Carolina, moved to
strike the words ^ of domestic manufacture '' from the
clause providing for the construction of ^^two steel
steam cruising vessels of war'' — ^thereby permitting
them to be built of foreign steel, if the Government
should so determine. The motion was defeated — ^yeas
' 20, all Democrats ; nays 30, all Republicans but five.

On July 3rd, Mr. Kelley moved to suspend the rules
of the House and take up the bill introduced January
20th by Hon. John R. Buck, of Connecticut, to
correct an error affecting the duty on knit goods.
This was agreed to and the bill was passed — ^yeas,
134; nays, 49. Three Republicans voted with the
Democrats in the negative, while twenty-one Demo-
crats voted for the bill. It was passed by the Senate,
on August 5th, — yeas 36, all Republicans but seven ;
nays 15 all Democrats — ^and was promptly approved
by the President.

On July 25th the bill by Mr. Kasson relative to the
duties " on materials for the construction of vessels, "
over which there had been much debate, was recom-
mitted to the Committee on Ways and Means — ^yeas
(Republicans), 100 ; nays (Democrats), 71.

62 THE TARIFF IK TKB JXAJm

In his second annual message, December 4,
President Arthur made the following recommendations
on the tariff : ^^ If the tax on domestic spirits is to be
retained, it is plain, therefore, that large reductions from
the custom revenue are entirely feasibla While recom-
mending this reduction, I am far from advising the
abandonment of the policy of so discriminating in the
adjustment of details as to afford aid and protection
to domestic labor.'^

At the beginning of the second session of the Forty-
seventh Congress, the Tariff Commission submitted an
exhaustive report to the House, with the volume of
testimony it had taken on the industrial conditions and
needs of the country. During the recess of Congress
the Commission had made a thorough investigation of
our various manufacturing interests, endeavoring to
ascertain in what manner and how far the tariff could
be reduced without inflicting damage or distress upon
any important line of manufactures^ or great interest of
industry, with a view to preserving intact our protective
system, and preventing ruinous competition with foreign
labor. It had visited all our great industrial centers
and by conscientious, careful and impartial work was
enabled to submit a most valuable report From it the
Committee on Ways and Means of the House formu-
lated and reported a bill reducing existing duties about
twenty per cent. The Commission's schedules were
largely followed ; some increases were made, but, in the
large majority of cases, where any deviation was made^
it was in the direction of a reduction of the duties, and
not of increase. It was estimated that the new bill, on

OF HENBT CLAY AND SINCE. 63

the basis of the importations of 1882, would decrease
the revenue about $22,000,000.

The bill was reported by Mr. Kelley, on January
16th, and debated until January 26th, many amend-
ments being agreed to. On the 26th the House voted
on the question of giving preference to the consideration
of the Internal Revenue Bill, and decidied agunst it —
yeas 100, all Democrats; nays 147, all Republicans,
except eighteen. On February 19th, Mr. Kelley at-
tempted to obtain a suspension of the rules and secure
the consideration of an internal revenue bill as an inde-
pendent measure. But this was not agreed to by the
requisite two-thirds majority — ^the vote resulting, yeas
162, for<y-8iz Democrats voting with the Republicans ;
nays 97, nineteen Republicans and Nationalists voting
with the Democrats.

Meanwhile the Senate passed the Internal Revenue
Bill (which the House had passed during the first ses-
sion), but not until after it had made such amendments
as to virtually revise the entire tariff. The bill had been
recommitted in December, 1882, to the Committee on
Finance, and on January 11, 1888, was reported by Mr.
Morrill, and its consideration continued until February
20th, when the bill was passed — ^yeas 42, all Repub-
licans except eleven ; nays 19, all Democrats but one.

When this bill reached the House, Hon. Thomas B.
Reed, of Maine, on February 26th, reported a new rule
in order to secure its consideration. Mr. Carlisle raised
the question of priority, but the House agreed to con-
sider the rule by a vote of 184 to 126, and after a
protracted parliamentary contest the rule was adopted,
and the bill was taken up. On February 27th a motion

M THE TABIFF IK THE DAYS

by Mr. Kelley to non-concur in the Senate amendments
and ask for a Committee of Conference was agreed to —
yeas, 147; nays. 111. The Speaker annoanced as con-
ferees on part of the House, Messrs. Kelley, McKinley,
Haskell, Randall and Carlisle. Mr. Randall asked to
to be excused, and after Mr. Morrison and Mr. Tucker
had also declined to serve, Mr. Speer, of Georgia, was
appointed. The Senate appointed as its conferees
Messrs. Sherman, Aldrich, Beck and Bayard. The two
latter asked to be excused, and after various appoint-
ments by the Chair from among the Democratic mem-
bers, all of whom declined to serve, Messrs. McDill,
of Iowa, and Mahone, of Virginia, were selected. This
was on March 1st, so that the session was within two
days of its close. On March Srd the Committee of Con-
ference reported, agi*eeing on the passage of the bill,
and this report was adopted by a vote of 152 to 116.
Eighteen Democrats voted with the Republicans in the
affirmative ; fourteen Republicans with the Democrats
in the negative. The members from the New England
States voted almost unanimously for it — ^twenty-four to
one ; those from the Middle States, for it by forty-nine
to twenty-two; from the West, for it by sixty-one to
thirty-three; from the South, against it by fifteen to
fifty-seven ; and from the Pacific States, neither for nor
against it, by three to three. A great objection to
the bill, from an agricultural standpoint, was the
heavy reduction on wool, and this caused a majority of
the Ohio delegation, although three to one Republican,
to vote against it. President Arthur gave it his imme-
diate approval, and it went into effect on July 1, 1883.
The House of Representatives was strongly Demo-

OF HENBY GLAY AKD 8IN0E. 66

cradc in the Forty-eighth Congress^ that party having
elected 196 of the 825 members. It organized by elect-
ing Mr. CarliBle, of Eentacky, Speaker, and by his
appointment Mr. Morrison became Chairman of the
Ways and Means Committee, although Mr. Randall had
been the ranking Democratic member in the previous
Congress.

On March 11, 1884, Mr. Morrison reported a bill '^to
reduce import and war tariff taxes," providing a hori-
zontal reduction of twenty per cent, upon the list of
dutiable articles, except those embraced in two schedules
— spirits and silks. It enlarged the free list by exempt-
ing from duty salt^ timber, and certain products of wooL
On April 15th, the House, then in Conmiittee of the
Whole, on revenue measures, voted — ^by 140 to 188 —
to take up this bill. General debate continued from
day to day until May 6th, when a motion by Hon.
George L. Converse, of Ohio, to ^ strike out the enact-
ing clause" was agreed to— yeas, 156; nays, 151. In
this action the House concurred by a vote of 159 to
155. But two Republicans voted with the Democrats
in the negative, while forty-one Democrats and three
Nationalists, under the leadership of Mr. Randall, united
with the Republicans to defeat the bilL

On April 7th, Mr. Converse moved to suspend the
niles and pass a bill ^^to restore the rates of duty on
imported wooL" This had been demanded by the plat-
forms of both parties in Ohio, and by a joint resolution
unanimously adopted by the Sixty-sixth Greneral Assem-
Wy of Ohio, on January 23, 1884. After a brief debate
the motion was disagreed to— yeas, 119; nays, 126 —
^^ot the requisite two-thirds in the affirmativa It

66 THE TABIFF IN THE BAY8

BQCured the support of seventy-nine Republicans and
forty Democrats, and was opposed by twelve Repub-
licans and one hundred and fourteen Democrata Every
Ohio member voting, except one, gave it his support.
Mr. Randall favored the motion, but it was strenuously
opposed by Messrs. Morrison, Mills, Blount, Brecken-
ridge, Cox, Hurd, and other active "tariff reformers.'*

On the same day the House adopted a resolution by
Mr. Thompson, of Kentucky, declaring *^ it unwise and
inexpedient for the present Congress to abolish or re-
duce the tax upon spirits distilled from grain " — ^yeas^
179; nays, 88. Later in the session, on June 21st, Mr.
Tucker, of Virginia, moved that the House "go into
Committee of the Whole to take up revenue biUs," the
pending measure being a bill " to repeal the tax on fruit
brandies." This was agreed to — ^yeas, 95 ; nays, 119 —
and a similar motion was defeated, on July 8rd, by 80
to 132.

On May 19th, Mr. Hurd moved to suspend the rules
and " abolish the discriminating duty on works of art
— the production of foreign and of American artists."
This was disagreed to — yeas, 52; nays, 178 — ^but the
vote was not on party lines.

The House, on the same day, passed without division
a bill "to prohibit the importation of contract labor,**
but it was not considered by the Senate at this session.
Constitutional amendments were offered in the House
by Hon. William H. Fiedler, of New Je.rsey, " on prison
labor,*' and by Hon. Robert T. Davis, of Massachusetts,
" on the hours of labor in textile-fabric manufactories.**
but neither was adopted.

At the Republican National Convention of 1884 the

OF HENBY CLAY AND BINGfi. 67

platform reported by the Committee on Resolutions was
unanimously adopted* Four of its planks were devoted
to the tariff, as follows :

4. It is the first duty of a good government to pro-
tect, the rights and promote the interests of its own
people. The largest diversity of industry is the most^
productive of general prosperity, and of the comfort and
independence of the people. We therefore demand that
the imposition of duties on foreign imports shall be
made, not for revenue only, but that in raising the
requisite revenues for the Government^ such duty shall
be so levied as to afford security to our diversified
industries and protection to the rights and wages of the
laborer; to the end that active and intelligent labor, as
well as capital, may have its just reward, and the labor-
ing man his full share in the National prosperity.

5. Against the so-called economic system of the Demo-
cratic party, which would degrade our labor to the
foreign standard, we enter our most earnest protest.
The Democratic party has failed completely to relieve
the people of the burden of unnecessary taxation by a
wise reduction of the surplu&

6. The Republican party pledges itself to correct the
irregularities of the tariff and to reduce the surplus, not
by the vicious and indiscriminating process of horizon*
tal reduction, but by such methods as will relieve the
taxpayer without injuring the laborer or the great pro-
ductive interests of the eountry.

7. We recognize the importance of sheep-husbandry
in the United States, the serious depression which it is
now experiencing, and the danger threatening its future
prosperity; and we therefore respect the demands of

68 THE TARIFF IN THE DATS

the representatives of this important agricultural inter-
est for a readjustment of duties upon foreign wool, in
order that such industry shall have full and adequate
protection.

Hon. James Gr. Blaine, of Maine, in his letter of
acceptance of the Kepublican nomination for the Presi-
dency, dated at Augusta, July 15, 1884, discussed the
tariff question with .his accustomed vigor and brilliancy.
He said:

^'Revenue laws are in their very nature subject to
frequent revision, in order that they may be adapted to
changes and modifications of trade. The Kepublican
party is not contending for the permanency of any par-
ticular statute. The issue between the two parties does
not have reference to a specific law. It is far broader
and far deepen It involves a principle of wide appli-
cation and beneficent influence against a theory which
we believe to be unsound in conception and inevitably
hurtful in practice. In the many tariff revisions which
have been necessary for the past twenty-three years, or
which may hereafter become necessary, the Republican
party has maintained and will maintain the policy of
protection to American industry, while our opponents
insist upon a revision which practically destroys that
policy. The issue is thus distinct, well-defined, and
unavoidable. The pending election may determine the
fate of protection for a generation. The overthrow of
the policy means a large and permanent reduction in
the wages of the American laborer besides involving
the loss of vast amounts of American capital invested
in manufacturing enterprises. The value of the pres-
ent revenue system to the people of the United States

OF HENBY CLAY AND SINCE. 69

is not a matter of theory, and I shall submit no argu-
ment to sustain it. I only invite attention to certain
facts of official record which seem to constitute a
demonstration.

^^ In the Census of 1850 an effort was made, for the
first time in our history, to obtain a valuation of all the
property in the United States. The attempt was in a
large degree unsuccessful. Partly from lack of time,
partly from prejudice from many who thought the
inquiries foreshadowed a new scheme of taxation, the
returns were incomplete and unsatisfactory. Little
more was done than to consolidate the local valuation
used in the States for purposes of assessment, and that,
as everybody knows, differs widely from a complete
exhibit of all the property.

"In the Census of 1860, however, the work was done
with great thoroughness — the distinction between
^assessed' value and *true' value being carefully
observed. The grand result was that the * true value '
of all the property in the States and Territories (exclud-
ing slaves) amounted to $14,000,000,000. This aggre-
gate was the net result of the labor and savings of all
the people within the area of the United States from
the time the first British colonist landed in 1607 down
to the year 1860. It represented the fruit of the toil
of two hundred and fifty years.

"After 1860 the business of the country was encour-
aged and developed by a protective tariff. At the end
of twenty years the total property of the United States,
as returned by the Census of 1880, amounted to the
enormous aggregate of $44,000,000,000. This great
result was attained notwithstanding the fact that

70 THE TABIFF IN THE DAYS

countless millions had in the interval been wasted in
the progress of a bloody war. It thus appears that
while our population between 1860 and 1880 increased
sixty per cent, the aggregate property of the country
increased two hundred and fourteen per cent., showing
a vastly enhanced wealth per capita among the people*
Thirty thousand millions of dollars had been added
during these twenty years to the present wealth of the
Nation.

^^ These results are regarded by the older nations of
the world as phenomenal. That our country should
surmount the peril and the cost of a gigantic war, and
for an entire period of twenty years make an average
gain to its wealth of $135,000,000 per month, surpasses
the experience of all other nations, ancient or modem.
Even the opponents of the present revenue system do
not pretend that in the whole history of civilization
any parallel can be found to the National progress of
the United States since the accession, of the Repub-
lican party to power.

^^ The period between 1860 and to-day has not been
one of material prosperity only. At no time in the
history of the United States has there been such
progress in the moral and philanthropic field. Reli-
gious and charitable institutions, schools, seminaries
and colleges, have been founded and endowed far
more generously than at any previous time in our
history. Greater and more varied relief has been
extended to human suffering, and the entire progress
of the country in wealth has been accompanied and
dignified by a broadening and elevation of our National
character as a people.^'

OF HEKBY CLAY AKB SINGE. 71

" Our opponents find fault that our revenue system
produces a surplus. But they should not forget that
the law has given a specific purpose to which all of the
surplus is profitably and honorably applied — the
reduction of the public debt, and the consequent relief
of the burden of taxation. No dollar has been wasted,
and the only extravagance with which the party stands
charged is the generous pensioning of soldiers, sailors,
and their families — an extravagtmce which embodies
the highest form of justice in the recc^ition and
payment of a sacred debt. When reduction of taxation
18 to be made, the Republican party can be trusted
to accomplish it in such form as will most effectively
aid the industries of the Nation.'^

At the Democratic National Convention of 1884 the
platform was adopted without division, after the rejec*
tion of a minority report offered by General Benjamin
F. Butler, of Massachusetts, by the test vote 714 to 97.
The planks relating to the tariff were as follows :

S. The Democracy pledges itself to purify the
Administration from corruption, to restore economy,
to revive respect for law, and to reduce taxation to the
lowest limit consistent with due regard to the preserva-
tion of the faith of the Nation to its creditors and
pensioners. Knowing full well, however, that legislation
affecting the operations of the people should be cautious
and conservative in method, not in advance of public
opinion, but responsive to its demands, the Democratic
party is pledged to revise the tariff in a spirit of fairness
to all interests. But, in making reduction in taxes, it is
^ot proposed to injure any domestic industries, but
father to promote their healthy growth. From the

72 THE TABIFF IN THE DAYS

foundation of this Government taxes collected at the
Castom Hoases have been the chief source of Federal
revenue. Such they must continue to be. Moreover,
many industries have come to rely upon legislation for
successful continuance, so that any change of law must
be at every step regardful of the labor and capital thus
involved. The process of the reform must be subject
in the execution to this plain dictate of justice — all
taxation shall be limited to the requirements of
economical government The necessaiy reduction in
taxation can and must be effected without depriving
American labor of the ability to compete successfully
with foreign labor, and without imposing lower rates of
duty than will be ample to cover any increased cost of
production which may exist in consequence of the
higher rate of wages prevailing in this country.
Sufficient revenue to pay all the expenses of the Federal
government economically administered, including pen-
sions, interest, and principal of the public debt, can be
had under our present system of taxation from Custom
House taxes upon fewer imported articles, bearing
heaviest on articles of luxury, and bearing lightest
on articles of necessity. We therefore denounce the
abuses of the existing tariff; and subject to the
preceding limitations, we demand that Federal taxation
shall be exclusively for public purposes, and shall not
exceed the needs of the Government economically
administered.

4. The system of direct taxation known as the ^in-
ternal revenue " is a war tax, and so long as the law
continues the money derived therefrom should be
sacredly devoted to the relief of the people from the

OF HENBT CLAY AND SINGE. 73

remaining burdens of the war, and be made a fnnd to
defray the expense of the care and comfort of worthy
soldiers in line of duty in the wars of the Republic, and
for the payment of such pensions as Congress may from
time to time grant to such soldiers, a like fund for the
sailors having been already provided ; and any surplus
should be paid into the Treasury.

Hon. Grovei*Cleveland, of New York, the Democralac
candidate for President, in his letter of acceptance, dated
at Albany, August 18, 1884, made no reply to the ar-
gument of Mr. Blaine that our unparalleled progress as
a Nation was in great measure due to the protective sys-
tem He merely recited the fact that ^'true American
sentiment recognizes the dignity of labor, and that
honor lies in honest toil/' There was a marked absence
of all reference to the economic policy which at that
time was becoming so direct an issue between the two
great parties.

Both parties entered upon the campaign with earnest-
ness and enthusiasm, but while the Republicans car-
ried most of the great States of the North by decisive
pluralities, they failed in the pivotal States of Indiana
and New York, and Mr. Cleveland was elected. Had
any one of a number of misfortunes been averted in the
State of New York, where the result hinged upon 1,047
votes in a total of 1,171,812, its electoral vote would
have been cast for Mr. Blaine, thereby securing his
election. It is not our purpose to inquire into the
causes of Mr. Blaine's defeat^ but it was in no sense due
to his masterly advocacy of the doctrine of protection,
for in New Jersey, New York, Connecticut^ and other
States, the leading orators of the Democratic party

74 TH£ TABIFF IK THE DATS

aimed constantly to show that their party and candi-
dates were as firmly committed to its support as the
Republicans.

The House of Representatives in the Forty-ninth
Congress, elected in 1884, was strongly Democratic —
that party electing one hundred and eighty-four of the
three hundred and twenty-five members. Mr. Car-
lisle was elected Speaker, and Mr. Morrison appointed
Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee. The
Senate was Republican, by forty-two of the seventy-six
members. Hon. John Sherman, of Ohio, was elected
President pro tem.y and Mr. Morrill, of Vermont, ap-
pointed Chairman of the Finance Committee.

CHAPTER in.

In hiB last annaal message to Congress, on December
1, 1884, President Arthur again recommended ^' the ab-
olition of all excise taxes except those relating to dis-
tilled spirits/' On Febroary 18, 1886, the Senate
passed the bill, as amended, which had passed the
House at the first session, '^ to prohibit the importation
of foreign contract labor.'' The amendments were con-
curred in by the House^ without division, on February
SSid, and the law was approved by the President on
the 26th. This ended a long and somewhat acrimonious
contest in favor of the position assumed by the friends
of protection.

In his inaugural address of March 4, 1886, Mr. Cleve-
land demanded that our finances should be ^' established
upon such a sound and sensible basis as shall secure the
safety and confidence of business interests and make
the wages of labor sure and steady ; and that our system
of revenue shall be so adjusted as to relieve the people
from unnecessary taxation, having a due regard to the

76 THE TABIFF IN THE DATS

interests of capital invested and workingmen employed
in American industries, and preventing the accumula-
tion of a surplus ia the Treasury to tempt extravagance
and waste."

There was nothing in this to indicate a departure from
the position of any of his Republican predecessors.

Again, in his first annual message to Congress, on
December 8, 1885, he said :

^^ The fact that our revenues are in excess of the act-
ual needs of an economical administration of the Gov-
ernment, justifies a reduction ia the amount exacted
from the people for its support Our Grovemment is
but the means established by the will of a free people,,
by which certain principles are applied which they
have adopted for their benefit and protection; and it
is never better administrated, and its true spirit is never
better observed, than when the people's taxation for its
support is scrupulously limited to the actual necessity
of expenditure, and distributed accoi'ding to a just and
equitable plan. The proposition with which we
have to deal is the reduction of the revenue received by
the Government, and indirectly paid by the people
from customs dues. The question of free trade is not
involved, nor is there now any occasion for the general
discussion of the wisdom or expediency of a protective
system. Justice and fairness dictate that in any modi-
fication of our present laws relating to revenne, the in-
dustries and interests which have been encouraged by
such laws, and in which our citizens have large invest-^
ments, should not be ruthlessly injured or destroyed.

^' We should also deal with the subject in such manner
as to protect the interests of American labor, which is*

OF HENBT GLAT AKD SINGE. 77

the capital of our workingmen ; its stability and proper
remimeration famish the most justifiable pretext for a
protective policy. Within these limitations a certain
reduction should be made in our customs revenue. The
amount of such reduction having been determined, the
inquiry follows, where can it best be remitted and what
articles can best be released from duty, in the interest
of our citizens. I think the reduction should be made
in the revenue derived from a tax upon the imported
necessaries of life. We thus directly lessen the cost of
living in every family of the land, and release to the
people in every humble home a larger measure of the
rewards of frugal industry."

On February 15, 1886, Mr. Morrison introduced a
bill " to reduce tariff taxes " which was referred to the
Committee on Ways and Means, and by it favorably
recommended, as amended, on April 12th. By this
measure, timber, sawed boards, hubs, staves, lath,
shingles, clapboards, logs, salt, fish, wool, flax, tow,
hemp, jute and sisal-grass were placed upon the free
list, subject to the condition that no export duty should
be charged upon them by the country from whence
imported. The duties on cotton cloth, thread, cord,
stockings, laces, embroideries, flax, hemp, and jute-
yams, linens, cables or cordage, woolen cloth, shawls,
flannels, blankets, yarns, clothing of all sorts, carpets,
and a great variety of similar domestic products, were
largely reduced, and the duty on sugar decreased ten
per cent. The bill also included certain modifications
of the administrative features of the law of 1883, which
had originally been offered as a separate measure by
Hon. Abram S. Hewitt, of New York.

78 THE TABIFF IN THE DATS

Oq June 17tli, Mr. Morrison moved that the House
resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole for the
consideration of this, the general tariff bill, but his
motion was lost — ^yeas, 140 ; nays, 157. The affirma-
tive vote was cast entirely by Democrats except four.
The n^ative vote included thirty-five Democrats, while
thirteen Democrats and fourteen Republicans were
either paired or did not vota The opposition forces
in the Democratic ranks were led by Mr. Randall to
whose influence the summary defeat of the bill was
largely attributed.

On June 28th, Mr» Randall introduced a bill in-
tended as a compromise between the existing law and
the reduction of duties already attempted. It was
estimated by its author that this bill would reduce
internal revenue taxes $26,407,088 ; customs duties on
articles still left dutiable, $7,044,462 ; and add to the
free list articles which paid a duty of $1,526,124 an-
nually, or a total reduction of $34,977,666. The Com-
mittee on Ways and Means reported this bill adversely,
on July 10th, and this ended all attempts at tariff
changes for the session.

The Labor Arbitration Bill which had passed the
House on April 3, 1886, was passed by the Senate on
February 28, 1887, without amendment, or division,
but failed to become a law because it was not acted
upon by the President. On the same day the Senate
passed, without opposition, the bill to prohibit the
employment of convict labor in the erection or con-
struction of public buildings, or other public works,
or in the preparation of materials to be used in such
buildings or works, which had passed the House on

OF HENBY CLAY AND 8IKCE. 79

March 9, 1886. This also failed by reason of Presi-
dent Cleveland not acting upon it

An amendment was offered, and adopted by the
Senate, to an appropriation of $94,000 for the Depart-
ment of Agriculture, on June lOth^ which required the
purchase and use of American-made machinery in the
manufacture of sugar from sorghum and sugar-cane, so
far as authorized by that Department To this the
House at first non-concurred; but, subsequently, on
Jane 29th, the report of the Committee of Conference
was agreed to* providing that such machinery should
be wholly of domestic material^ except so much of it as
was then under contract, not exceeding $10,000 in
valu^ or such of it as could not be built in the
United States within the period in which it was needed.
The amendment was important as establishing a princi-
ple which ought never to have been seriously contro-
verted.

At the second session, Mr. Morrison again attempted
to have his bill considered by the House in Committee
of the Whole. His motion to that effect, on December
18, 1886, was defeated — ^yeas, 148; nays, 167. Six
Bepublicans voted in the negative; twenty-six Demo-
crats in the affirmative ; and five Bepublicans and four-
teen Democrats did not vote.

Hon. Frank Hiscock, of New York, on December
20th, moved to suspend the rules and pass a bill regu-
lating the duties on leaf tobacco. The motion was lost
— ^yeas, 90; nays, 164 ; not voting, 67.

Hon. John S. Henderson, of North Carolina, on
March 8, 1887, the closing day of the session, attempted
to secure a suspension of the rules and the passage of a

ao THE TABIFF IN THE BATO

bill modifying the internal revenue laws, relating to
the sale of leaf tobacco, and for other purposes. The
motion failed to receive the necessary two-thirds vote-
yeas 189, all Democrats but nine ; nays, 112, all Repub-
licans but five, while sixty-eight members did not vote.

The Democratic majority in the House of Represen-
tatives in the Fiftieth Congress, elected in 1886, was
materially reduced, that party electing but 169 of the
325 members. Mr. Carlisle was reelected Speaker, and
Mr. Mills became Chairman of the Ways and Means
Committee. The Senate remained Republican by two
votes, with Hon. John J. Ingalls, of Kansas, as Presi-
dent j>ro tem.y and Mr. Morrill, Chairman of the Finance
Committee.

The attention not only of this Congress, but of the
whole country, was sharply arrested by Mr. Cleveland's
third annual message, of December 6, 1887. It was an
extraordinary document and in direct contrast to his
two preceding annual messages. It was laigely devoted
to a consideration of the tariff, upon which he was
thought to have previously held a conservative posi«
tion. In the course of his recommendations, Mr. Cleve-
land observed :

^ But our present tariff laws, the vicious, inequitable,
and illogical source of unnecessary taication, ought to
be at once revised and amended. These laws, as their
primary and plain effect, raise the price to consumers of
all articles imported and subject to duty, by precisely the
sum paid for such duties. Thus the amount of the duty
measures the tax paid by those who purchase for use
these imported articles. Many of these things, however,
are raised or manufactured in our own country, and the

OF HENBY CLAY AND 8IN01L 81

duties now levied upon foreign goods and products are
called protection to these home manufactures, because
the J render it possible for those of our people who are
Tnannfacturera to make these taxed articles and sell
them i^or a price equal to that demanded for the impor-
ted goods that have paid customs duty. So it happens
that whilm comparatively a few use the imported articles,
millions of our people, who never used and never saw
any of the foreign products, purchase and use things of the
same kind made in this country, and pay therefor nearly
or quite the same enhanced price which the duty adds
to the imported articles. Those who buy imports pay
the duty charged thereon into the public Treasury ; but
the great majority of our citizens, who buy domestic ar-
ticles of the same class, pay a sum at least approximately
equal to this duty to the home manufacturer. This ref-
erence to the operation of our tariff laws is not made
by way of instruction, but in order that we may be
constantly reminded of the manner in which they im-
pose a burden upon those who consume domestic pro-
ducts as weU as those who consume imported articles,
and thus create a tax upon all our people.''

And again : ^ It is a condition which confronts us
— not a theory. Relief from this condition may in-
volve a slight reduction of the advantages which we
award our home productions, but the entire withdrawal
of such advantages should not be contemplated. The
question of free trade is absolutely irrelevant ; and the
persistent claim, made in certain quarters, that all ef-
forts to relieve the people from unjust and unnecessary
taxation are schemes of so-called ' free-traders ' is mis-
chievous and far removed from any consideration for

81 THE TAKIFF IN THE DAYS

the pablic good. The simple and plain duty which
we owe to the people is to reduce taxation to the neoes*
saiy expenses of an economical operation of the Govern-
ment, and to restore to the business of the country the
money which we hold in the Treasury through the per-
version of governmental powers. These things can and
should be done with safety to all our industries, with-
out danger to the opportunity for remunerative labor
which our workingmen have, and with benefit to them
and all our people, by cheapening their means of sub-
sistence and increasing the measure of their comforts.^
But however much the country was startled at Mr.
Cleveland's position, his views were not at once contro-
verted by any of the great leaders of Congress, nor did
the press challenge the fairness or accuracy of his state-
ments in such a way as to command the attention of the
public* Indeed, it was reserved for Mr. Blaine, then
traveling in Europe, to do this in a manner that dis-
played all that marvelous brilliancy and sagacity in
leadership for which he had so long been distinguished.
In a letter to Hon. R F. Jones, of Pittsburg, then
Chairman of the Republican National Committee, dated
at Florence, Italy, January 25, 1888, he declined to allow
his name to be again presented as a candidate for
the Presidency, then hastily but clearly pointed out
the vastly improved prospects for party success, and
strongly asserted the impregnable position of the Re-
publican party upon the tariff question, in the combat
to which the President had so boldly challenged them.
He recited but plain historical facts^ which were after
ward abundantly proven by the testimony of the most
prominent Democrats in Congress, when he said :

OF HENBT CLAY AXB 8IKGZL 83

''Another feature of the political situation should
inspire Republicans with irresistible strength. The
present National administration was elected with, if not
upon, the repeated assertions of its leading supporters
in every protectipn State that no issue on the tariff was
involved. However earnestly Republicans urged that
question as the one of controlling importance in the
campaign, they were met by the Democratic leaders and
journals with persistent evasion, concealment^ and de-
niaL This resource the President has fortunately re-
moved. The issue which the Republicans maintained
and the Democrats avoided in 1884 has been prom-
inently and specifically brought forward by the Demo-
cratic President, and can not be hidden out of sight
in 1888. The country is now in the enjoyment of an
industrial system which, in a quarter of a century, has
assured a larger National growth, a more rapid accumu-
lation, and a broader distribution of wealth than were
ever before known to history. The American people
will now be openly and formally asked to decide
whether this system shall be recklessly abandoned and
a new trial be made of an old experiment which has
uniformly led to National embarrassment and wide-
spread individual distress. On the result of such an
issue, fairly presented to the popular judgment, there is
no room for doubt.

'^ A closer observation of the conditions of life among
the older nations gives one a more intense desire that
the American people shall make no mistake in choos-
ing the policy which inspires with hope and crowns it
with dignity, which gives safety to capital and protects
its increase, which secures political power to every citi*

84 THE TABIFF IK THE DAYS

sen, comfort and cnltore to every home. To this end,
not less earnestly and more directly as a private citizen
than as a public candidate, I shall devote myself, with
the confident belief that the administration of ^the Gov-
ernment will be restored to the party which has demon-
strated the purpose and power to wield it for the unity
and the honor of the Republic ; for the prosperity and
progress of the people.^

Both parties were now aroused to the most intense
earnestness, and, almost as a natural and inevitable con-
sequence, what is probably the most remarkable Con-
gressional tariff debate in our history was at once begun.
A bill entitled ^ A bill to reduce taxation and simplify
the laws in relation to the collection of revenue" was
reported to the House by Mr. Mills, Chairman of the
Ways and Means Committee, on April 2, 1888. It was
accompanied by both majority and minority reports;
the former signed by the Democratic members of the
Committee and submitted by Mr. Mills, and the latter
by the Republican members and submitted by Mr.
McKinley. The general debate was opened on April
17th by Mr. Mills in support of the bill and he was an-
swered by the veteran economist, William D. Kelley, who
opposed it. This continued uninteruptedly until May
19th, when it was closed by arguments in favor of the bill
by Speaker Carlisle and against it by Mr. Reed, of Maina
Then came the debate under the five-minute rule, which
proceeded, under the inspiration and encouragement of
the Presidential campaign then pending, with great
vigor and earnestness from May 81st to July 19th.
Congress had never before known anything like it.
Hon. William M. Springer, of Illinois, stated at its

OF HBNBY CLAY AND SINCE. 85

dose that '^twenty-tliree day and eight eyening seasioiui
had been consamed in the debate, during which the
bill received the exclusive consideration of the House
for one hundred and eleven hours and fifty-four min-
utes.^ The time, it appeared, had been about evenly
divided between the speakers of the two great parties —
'^ fifty-eix hours and eighteen minutes were allotted to
the Democrats and fifty-five hours and thirty-six min-
utes to the Republicans.'' In all some ^^one hundred
and fifty-one speeches were made in the general debate,'^
and in that upon the paragraphs separately, '^twenty
days, or one hundred and twenty-eight hours and ten
minutes'' were consumed in fully as many speeches
more* In other words, fifty-one days were devoted to
the bill from b^inning to end of the remarkable de-
bate, two hundred and forty hours of actual talk in-
dulged in by the members of the House alone. If to
this be added the particulars of the debate in the Sen-
ate, some fiEunt idea can be formed of the patient, dose
and searching attention Congress has given to the de-
tails of tariff legislation during recent years, and of the
immense amount of work involved in their intelligent
consideration. No one seems to have calculated the
exact volume of the speeches on ^Hhe Mills bill," so
called, but it is safe to say that were all printed in full
they would easily fill twenty to thirty volumes the size
of a quarto or unabridged dictionary.

It would be impossible to attempt a synopsis of
even the principal speeches in this protracted debate.
One or two points in a few of the vast number will
alone be mentioned. Mr. Mills, in his opening speech,
observed that he had ^^gone through with a number of

86 THE TABIFF IN THE DAYS

artides taken from the reports made by manuiacturers
themselves, and had shown that the tariff (the protec-
tive tariff of 1888) was not framed for the benefit of
the laborer, or that if it was so intended by those who
framed it, the benefit never reaches the laborer — not a
dollar of it. The working-people are hired in the mar-
ket at the lowest rates at which their services can be
had, and all the boodle that has been granted by these
tariff bills goes into the pockets of the manu&ctarers.
It builds up palaces; it concentrates wealth; it
makes great and powerful magnates; but it distri-
butes none of its benificence in the homes of our labor-
ing poor."

In reply to this, the testimony of the workingmen
themselves was presented, especially the testimony of
those who had worked in the same branches of in-
dustry on both sides of the Atlantic, and whose oppor-
tunity for information from experience in both
countries made their evidence not only interesting and
important, but absolutely incontrovertible. The bur-
den of such testimony was that the American working-
man was from two to four times better paid for the
same labor than his European competitor, while
as against his Asiatic or Australasian competitor there
was scarcely any comparison possible, so great were
the advantages in favor of the laborers of the United
States. Turning then to the testimony of our manu-
facturers, it was shown by a letter from William
Barbour, the great thread manufacturer of Paterson,
New Jersey, that while he was running factories
in both countries, so great was the difference in wages
that his 1,400 American laborers were paid, in 1888|

OF HENBY CLAY AND SINCE. 87

nearly the exact sum which his 3,900 laborers
were paid for the same work iu Ireland. The Singer
Se^ng Machine Company maintained a factory in
Glasgoi^ as well as in 'New Jersey, and though it em-
ployed in Scotland one-third more hands than it
did in America, yet its pay-roll in Europe was only
half as great as in the United States — ^the actual
figures being in Scotland $18,000 and in New Jersey
$85,000. The Boston Thread aud Twine Company
also certified that ^Hhey were in the United States
paying three times the average wages paid for similar
labor throughout Europe." But the most conclusive
testimony was a voluntary statement, in a petition to
Congress, from the representatives of at least half a mill-
ion workmen of the United States, in the Amalgamated
Aaaociation of Iron and Steel and Glass Workers of
America. They said, impressively : ^ We know that we
receive our share of the benefits of protection on
the industries we represent. We therefore emphatically
protest against any redaction of the duties that will
bring us on a level with the low price paid for labor in
Europe. We insist upon the maintenance of a strong
protective tariff, in order to maintain an American
standard of wages for American workingmen.''

Hon. Thomas B. Reed, of Maine, in an argument,
unique, original and effective, gave a new version of a
story from ^sop, with which the country was soon
familiar. ''Where," he asked, ''is the best market in
ihe world ? Where the people have the most money
to spend. Where have the people the most money to
spend? Right here in the United States of America
after twenty-seven years of protectionist rule. And

88 THE TARIFF IN THE DAYS

yon are asked to give up sacli a market for the markets
of the world. Why, the history of such a transaction
was told twenty-four hundred years ago. It is a
classic. You will find it in the words of .£sopi the
fabulist:

*^ Once there was a dog. He was a nice little dog.
Nothing the matter with him except a few foolish free-
trade ideas in his head. He was trotting along happy
as the day, for he had in his mouth a nice shoulder of
succulent mutton. By and by he came to a stream
bridged by a plank. He trotted along, and, looking
over the side of the plank, he saw the markets of the
world, and dived for them. A minute after he was
crawling up the bank the wettest, the sickest, the nasti-
est, and the most muttonless dog that ever swam
ashore.'*

Mr. Carlisle spoke on the same subject, but in a quite
different vein. He addressed himself to the matter of
the '^ home market '* as follows :

«In 1880 there were $215,000,000 invested in cotton
manufactures, and there were employed in that industry
172,554 handa To work up our present production of
raw cotton would require an investment in the manu-
facture of (660,000,000, tod the employment of 617,662
hands. If we have been more than one hundred years,
part of the time under very high taiiffs, in so developing
our cotton manufactures as to enable them to take one-
third of our product at European prices, how
many more centuries will be required to enable them to
consume the whole product at prices fixed by competi-
tion here at home ? When gentlem^ have solved this
problem to the satisfaction of the . American cotton-

OF HENBT CLAT AND SINGE. 89

grower, he may be able to listen with patience to the
argument by which they attempt to convince him of
the immense advantages of a home market that will
never exist."

Mr. Randall, although in failing health, felt con-
strained to speak upon and criticise the pending bill
very sbarply. It was in the course of these remarks
that Mr. Randall made his much quoted and unanswer-
able argument in favor of sustaining our home markets.
" If,'' he reasoned, " the farmer ceases to buy the pro-
duct of the manufacturers, he will certainly cease to sell
to them, but must sell his products in the market where
he bays what he consumes himself. Suppose last year
we had manufactured a thousand millions' worth less
than we did and had gone abroad for these products, ex-
pecting to pay for them with agricultural products, could
a thousand millions more of agricultural products have
been sold abroad at the price which products brought
here ? We sold all the wheat and com and meat pro-
ducts that Europe could take at the price that pre-
vailed. Who can tell at what prices Europe would have
taken five hundred millions or even one hundred
millions more of our agricultural products than she did
take? The mere statement of the proposition is
enough to disclose the error on which it is founded, and
shows the importance of uniting manufactures with
agriculture, or, as Jefferson states it, ^putting the manu-
facturer by the side of the farmer.' In fact, both must
in our country depend almost exclusively on the home
market It is folly, if not a crime, to attempt to change
it in these respects. It would bring ruin and bank-
ruptcy without the possibility of having such a result

90 THE TABIFF IN THE DAT8

accomplished. The greater the diversity of industries
in any country, the greater the wealth-producing power
of the people, and the more there is for labor and
capital to divide, and the more independent that
country becomea"

The House came to a vote on July 21sty and the bill
was passed — ^yeas 162, all Democrats but three; nays
149, all Republicans but four. Fourteen members did
not vote. Among these was Mr. Randall, who was
paired with a Democrat who favored the bilL The
sectional character of the proposed legislation is ap-
parent from the vote on its passage. New England
cast seven yeas^ seventeen nays; the Middle States,
yeas twenty-eight, nays forty-six; the Western, yeas
forty-two, nays sixty-eight; the Southern, yeas eighty-
three, nays twelve; and the Pacific, yeas two, nays
six.

The bill was referred in the Senate to the Committee
on Finance, which prepared a substitute which was re-
ported on October 8th, but no attempt was made to
push it to a vote before adjournment. The Senate
substitute followed the lines indicated by the Chicago
platform very closely. It sought a reduction of the
revenue of from $60,000,000 to $70,000,000, but in do-
ing this maintained the protective features of the law
of 1888. Tobacco was made free ; the tax on alcohol
used in the arts greatly reduced, and the tariff on sugar
cut in two. It has been said that the text of '^the
Mills bill " formed the main issue in the Presidential
canvass of 1888, and its provisions were certainly very
fully discussed both in Congress and throughout the
country. Congress adjourned on October 20th, after

OF HENBT CLAY AND SIKGE. 91

having been continuously in session for nearly eleven
months.

It was at this session that Congress passed the act of
October 1, 1888, to prohibit Chinese immigration — a
law of direct and great importance to all American
laborers. Hon. William L. Scott, of Pennsylvania, in-
troduced the bill on September 8rd, and it was at once
passed by the House without a division. The Senate
acted with similar promptness. On September 7th,
Hon. Arthur P. Gk>rman, of Maryland; moved that it be
referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations, but
his motion was lost — ^yeas nineteen, Democrats sixteen,
Bepnblicans three; nays twenty. Republicans sixteen.
Democrats four. The bill was then passed — ^yeas thirty
seven, Republicans nineteen. Democrats eighteen ; nays
three, two Republicans and one Democrat. The meas-
ure was probably presented as a matter of party ex-
igency in the effort to place the Administration right
with the laborers of the country, but if such was its
purpose, it failed entirely to injure the Republican
minority, or place the party in a false position before
the country.

One of the minor measures affecting labor, passed at
this session, was an amendment to the Urgent De-
ficiency Bill offered on February 17, 1888, by Hon
John J. O'Neill of Missouri, and providing that the
Public Printer should rigidly enforce the provisions of
the eight-hour law in the department under his charge.
This was of importance on account of the value of the
example, and as establishing a precedent which would
in time be generally respected. The amendment was
ordered by the vote, yeas 182, nays 58, all voting in the

92 THE TAUFF IN THE DATS

negative being without exception Democrata On
March 7th the Senate voted to strike oat the clause —
yeas 82, nays 20, all of the latter Republicans except
ona The House, on March 15th, refused to concur in
this action, and in conference the Senate receded from
its position and agreed to the amendment \

In the Senate, on February 17th, pending considera-
tion of a bill to incorporate the Washington Electric
Railway, in the District of Columbia, an amendment
was offei-ed by the Committee requiring that the rails
to be used should be ^^ of American manufacture." It
was agreed to — ^yeas twenty-five, all Republicans but
two ; nays seventeen. The House did not consider the
bill.

In the meanwhile the National conventions of the
two great parties had been held. The Democrats con-
vened at St. Louis on June Sth, and promptly and
unanimously renominated President Cleveland, by accla-
mation. The ticket was completed with great enthus-
iasm and practical unanimity by the nomination of the
venerable Allen G. Thurman, of Ohio, for Vice-Presi-
dent, by 690 votes to 105 for Isaac P. Gray, of Indiana,
and twenty-five for John C. Black, of Illinois. On the
second day the platform was adopted, with but little
opposition. It declared :

'^ All unnecessary taxation is unjust taxation. It is
repugnant to the creed of Democracy that by such tax-
ation the cost of the necessaries of life should be un-
justly increased to all our people. Judged by Demo-
cratic principles, the interests of the people are betrayed
when, by unnecessary taxation, trusts and combinations
are permitted to exist, which, while unduly enriching

OP HENBY CLAY AND SINCE. 93

the few that combine, rob the body of our citizens by
depriving them of the benefits of natural competition.
Every Democratic rule of governmental action is vio-
lated when, through unnecessary taxation, a vast sum
of money, far beyond the needs of an economical ad-
ministratioj^, is drawn from the people and the chan-
nels of trade, and accumulated as a demoralizing sur-
plus in the National treasury.

"The money now lying in the Federal Treasury, re-
sulting from superfluous taxation, amounts to more than
$125,000,000, and the surplus collected is reaching the
sum of more than $60,00,000 annually. Debauched by
this immense temptation, the remedy of the Republican
party is to meet and exhaust by extravagant appropria-
tions and expenses, whether constitutional or not, the
accumulation of extravagant taxation. The Democratic
policy is to enforce frugality in public expense and
abolish unnecessary taxation. Our established domestic
industries and enterprises should not and need not be
endangered by a reduction and correction of the burdens
of taxation. On the contrary, a fair and careful re-
vision of our tax laws, with due allowance for the dif-
ference between the wages of American and foreign
labor, must promote and encourage every branch of such
industries by giving them assurances of an extended
market and steady and continuous operation. In the
interests of American labor, which should in no event
be neglected, revision of our tax laws, contemplated by
the Democratic party, should promote the advantage of
sack labor by cheapening the cost of the necessaries of
life in the home of every workingman, and at the same
time secure to him steady and remunerative employ-

H THE TARIFF IN THE DATS

ment '^ Upon this phase of tariff reform, so closely con*
cerning every phase of our National life, and upon every
question involved in the problem of good government^
the Democratic party submits its principles and profes-
sions to the intelligent suffrage of the American peo*
pie."

Hon. William L. Scott, of Pennsylvania, offered and
secured the adoption of the following additional resolu-
tion :

^' Resolved, That this Convention hereby endorses and
recommends the early passage of the bill for the reduc-^
tion of the revenue now pending in the House of Repre*
sentatives."

The Republican National Convention convened in
Chicago on June 19th. Its platform, reported on June
21st, was unanimously adopted. The planks relating
to the tariff were as follows :

^ We are uncompromisingly in favor of the American
system of protection ; we protest against its destruction
as proposed by the President and his party. They serve
the interests of Europe ; we will support the interests
of America. We accept the issue and confidently appeal
to the people for their judgment The protective sys>
tem must be maintained. Its abandonment has always
been followed by general disaster to all interests ex-
cept those of the usurer and sheriff We denounce the
Mills bill as destructive to the general business, the
labor, and the farming interests of the country, and we
heartily endorse the consistent and patriotic action of
the Republican Representatives in Congress in oppos-
ing its passage. We condemn the proposition of the
Democratic party to place wool on the free list.

OF HENBT CLAT AND SINCE. 95

and we insist that the duties thereon shall be ad-
JQsted and maintained so as to furnish full and adequate
protection to that industry throughout the United
States.

^ The Republican party would effect all needed re»
duction of the National revenue by repealing the taxes
upon tobacco, which are an annoyance and burden to
agriculture, and the tax upon spirits used in the arts and
for mechanical purposes, and by such revision of the
tariff laws as will tend to check imports of such articles
as are produced by our people, the production of which
^ves employment to our labor, and release from import
duties those articles of foreign production except lux-
uries, the like of which cannot be produced at home. If
there shall still remain a larger revenue than is requisite
for the wants of the Government, we favor the repeal of
the internal taxes entirely rather than the surrender of
any part of our protective system at the joint behest of
the Whisky Bing and the agents of foreign manufac-
turers.

'^We declare our hostility to the introduction into
this country of foreign contract labor, and of Chinese
labor, alien to our civilization and Constitution, and we
demand the rigid enforcement of the existing laws
against it^ and favor such immediate legislation as will
exclude such labor from our shores.

'^We declare our opposition to all combinations of
capital organized in trusts or otherwise to control arbi-
trarily the condition of trade among our citizens ; and
we recommend to Congress and the State legislatures, in
their respective jurisdictions, such legislation as will
prevent the execution of all schemes to oppress the

M THE TABIFF IN THE DATS

people by undue charges on their supplies, or by unjust
rates for the transportation of their products to market
We approve the legislation by Congress to prevent
alike unjust burdens and unfair discriminations between
the States/'

The Convention completed its work on June 26th by
the nomination, on the eighth ballot, of General Ben-
jamin Harrison, of Indiana, for President, and Hon. Levi
P. Morton, of New York, on the first ballot, for Vice-
President.

Mr. Cleveland gave his formal letter of acceptance to
the public on September 8th. In this he adhered to his
offc-repeated declaration that ^Hhe consumer pays the
tax,'' ignoring entirely the well-known fact that not a
few articles of common use and American manufacture
were then selling in the markets at a less price than the
amount of the duty levied upon similar articles made in
foreign countries. He said :

"The cost of the Grovemment must continue to be
met by tariff duties collected at our custom houses upon
imported goods, and by internal revenue taxes assessed
upon spirituous and malt liquors, tobacco, and oleo-
margarine. I suppose it is needless to explain that all
these duties and assessments are added to the price of
the articles upon which they are levied, and thus
become a tax upon all those who buy these articles for
use and consumption. I suppose, too, it is well under-
stood that the effect of this tariff taxation is not limited
to the consumers of imported articles, but that the duties
imposed upon such articles permit a corresponding
increase in prices to be laid upon domestic productions
of the same kind, which increase, paid by all our people

OF HENBT CLAT AND SINGE. 97

as consumeTB of home productions, and entering every
American home, constitutes a form of taxation as certain
and as inevitable as though the amount was annually
paid into the hand of the tax-gatherer.^

General Harrison's letter of acceptance was dated at
Indianapolis, September 11th, and was a model in style,
force and propriety. In discussing the tariff he classed
thoee who held to the theory that ^^the import duty
upon foreign goods sold in our markets is paid by the
consomer" as ^* students of maxims, and not of the
markets" — a phrase that was soon immensely popular
with the country.

^The Bepublican party, said he, ^' holds that a pro-
tective tariff is constitutional, wholesome and necessary.
We do not offer a fixed schedule, but a principle. We
will revise the schedule, modify the rates, but always
with an intelligent provision as to the effect upon
domestic production and the wages of our working
people. We believe it to be one of the worthy objects
of tariff legislation to preserve the American market for
American producers and to maintain the American scale
of wages by adequate discriminating duties upon foreign
competing products. The effect of lower rates and
larger importations upon the public revenue is con-
tingent and doubtful, but not so the effect upon
American production and American wages.''

The campaign resulted in a decisive Republican
victory. General Harrison received 283 electoral votes
to 168 for Mr. Cleveland. Congress also was Bepublican
in both branches — the Senate, Republicans 47, Demo-
crats 37; the House, Republicans 173, Democrats 167.
In his annual message of December 8, 1888, at the

SB THE TABIFF IK THE DATS

opening of the second session of the B^eth Congress,
Mr. Cleveland observed that with its expiration *^ the first
centory of our oonstitntional existence as a Nation will
have been completed.^ Nor could he view the fdtore
without fear and dismay, for while we could ^'view
with pride and satisfaction the bright picture of our
country's growth and prosperity, yet a closer scrutiny
develops a sombre shading. Upon more careful in-
spection we find the wealth and luxury of our cities
mingled with poverty and wretchedness and unremun*

native toil.'' '^The people must still be

taxed for the support of the Government under the

operation of tariff laws The farmers were

forced by the action of the Government to pay for the
benefit of others such enhanced ^prices for the things
they need that the scanty returns of their labor fail to
furnish their support, or leave margin for accumulation."

^'Our workingmen, too," continued Mr. Cleveland,
^ enfranchised from all delusions, and no longer fright-
ened by the cry that their wages are endangered by a
just revision of our tariff laws, will reasonably demand
through such revision steadier employment, cheaper
meaps of living in their homes, freedom for themselves
and their children from the doom of perpetual servi-
tude, and an open door to their advancement beyond
the limits of a laboring class. Others of our citizens
whose comforts and expenditures are measured by
moderate salaries and fixed incomes will insist upon
the fairness and justice of cheapening the cost of neces-
saries for themselves and their families."

Such was the fair promise of " tariff reform " — good
wages, steady employment, cheaper living, and Indus*

OF HEKBT CLAY AND SINGE.

tria^ onnimercialy and social advancement. We shall
see how it iwi^kept in later years after only a partial
triomph of the theecies and policy it involved.

The Senate immediate resumed consideration of
^the Mills bill«'^ /the pending question being on the
adoption of the substitute offered bjr the Finance Com-
mitee. The bill was debated from December 6th until
January 22nd, when the substitute, as amended in
Committee of the Whole, was concurred in and the
bill passed by a strictly party vote — ^yeas, Republicans,
thirty-two; nays. Democrats, thirty. When the bill
reached the House it was referred to the Committee on
Ways and Means. On February 16th Mr. Mills re-
ported it back as originally passed by the House, with
the Senate substitutef and a resolution to the effect
that the substitute being in effect ^' another and differ-
ent bill," it was in direct ^^ conflict with the true intent
and purpose of Section seven, Article I, of the Con-
stitution (which vests in the House the sole power to
originate revenue measures) and should be returned to
the Senate." No vote was then taken, but on February
23rd, Mr. Randall raised the question of consideration.
The motion was lost — ^yeas 89, all Democrats, but two
Independents ; nays 144, all Republicans, except thirty,
while eighty-nine members did not vote at all.

Hon. Richard P. Bland, of, Missouri, moved to recon-
sider this vote, but Mr. Randall moved to lay that
motion on the table, and this was agreed to — ^yeas 166,
«11 Republicans but forty-two ; nays 88, all Democrats.
This ended the fight No further action or vote was
taken, and so the Senate substitute was not considered
in the House at alL

100 THS TAEIFF IN THE DATS

Hon. Henry H. Gowles, of North Garolinay introdaced
a bill in the House on January 14, 1889, to amend the
internal revenue laws, being the same as the provisions
of that part of the Mills bill. He moved that it be re-
ferred to the Committee on Appropriations instead of
Ways and Means, and it was agreed to — ^yeas 126, all
Republicans but twenty-four ; nays 91, all Democrats ;
not voting 106. Mr. Randall reported the bill favorably
on February 16th, and it was referred to the Committee
of the Whola On the 22nd he reported a rule pro-
viding for its consideration, from the Committee on
Rules, but neither the bill nor rule ever secured further
attention.

On the same day, Hon. John M. Brower, of North
Carolina, introduced a bill to repeal the tobacco tax
in all its forms, and moved that it be referred to the
Committee on War Claims. It was lost — ^yeas 101, all
Republicans but five ; nays 117, all Democrats but five ;
and 106 not voting. The bill was then referred to the
Conmiittee on Ways and Means, and despite another
effort at consideration on January 21st, it was never
reported to the House.

President Harrison made but brief reference to the
tariff in his inaugural address of March 4, 1889. ^ It will
be the duty of Congress,'^ said he, ^ wisely to forecast any
extraordinary demands^ and, having added them to our
ordinary expenditures, to so adjust our revenue laws
that no considerable annual surplus will remain. We
will fortunately be able to apply to the redemption of
the public debt any small and unforeseen excess of rev-
enue. This is better than to reduce our income below
pur necessary expenditures, with the resulting choice

OF HENBT GLAY AND SINGE. 101

between another change of our revenue laws and an In-
crease of the public debt It is quite possible^ I am
sure, to effect the necessary reduction in our revenues
without breaking down our protective tai-iff or seriously
injoring any domestic industry.*'

The House of Representatives in the Fifty-first Con-
gress organized by electing Hon. Thomas B. Beed, of
Maine, Speaker, who appointed the following mem-
bers as the Committee on Ways and Means : William
McKinley, of Ohio, Chairman, Julius C. Burrows, of
Michigan, Thomas M. Bayne, of Pennsylvania, Nelson
Dingley, Jr., of Maine, Joseph McKenna, of California,
Sereno E. Payne, of New York, Robert M. LaFoUette,
of Wisconsin, John H. Gear, of Iowa, Republicans;
Roger Q. Mills, of Texas, Benton McMillan, of Ten-
nessee^ Roswell P. Flower, of New York, Henry G.
Turner, of Georgia, Democrat&

Mr. Harrison gave direct, intelligent, and effective
consideration to the tariff in his first annual message to
Congress, December 8, 1889. He said :

'^ I recommend a revision of our tariff law, both in
the administrative features and in the schedules. The
need of the former is generally conceded, and an agree-
ment upon the evils and inconveniences to be remedied
and the best methods for their correction will probably
not be difficult Uniformity of valuation at all our
ports is essential, and effective measures should be
taken to secure it. It it equally desirable that ques-
tions affecting rates and classifications should be
promptly decided. The preparation of a new schedule
of customs duties is a matter of gi*eat delicacy because
of its direct <^ect upon the business of the country, and

lOa THE TARIFF IN T9B DATS

of great difficulty by reason of the wide divergence of
opinion as to the objects that may properly be pro-
moted by such l^islation. Some disturbance of busi-
ness may, perhaps, result from the consideration of this
subject by Congress, but this temporary ill-effect will
be reduced to the minimum by prompt action and by
the assurance which the country already enjoys that
any necessary changes will be so made as not to impair
the just and reasonable protection of our home indus-
tries. The inequalities of the law should be adjusted,
but the protective principle should be maintained and
fEurly applied to the products of our farms as well as
our shops. These duties necessarily have relation to
other things beside the public revenues. We can not
limit their effects by fixing our eyes on the public Treas-
ury alona They have a direct relation to home pro-
duction, to work, to wages, and to the commercial inde-
pendence of our country, and the wise and patriotic
legislator should enlarge the field of his vision to in-
clude all of thesa The necessary reduction in our
public revenues can, I am sure, be made without mak-
ing the smaller burden more onerous than the larger,
by reason of the disabilities and limitations which the
process of reduction puts upon both capital and labor.
The free list can very safely be extended by placing
thereon articles that do not offer injurious competition
to such domestic products as our home labor can supply.
The removal of the internal tax upon tobacco would
relieve an important agricultural product from a burden
which was imposed only because our revenue from cus-
toms duties was insufficient for the public needs. If safe
provision against fraud can be devised, the removal of

OF HENBY CliAT AND BINGE. 103

the tax upon spirits used in the arts and in manufac-
tures would also offer an unobjectionable method of
reducing the surplus.*^

On December ITth^ Mr. McKinley introduced the
first important tariff measure of the session — ^a bill ^^to
simplify the laws in relation to the collection of the
revenue.'' Its object was to protect the honest im-
porter in the United States against the unscrupulous
and dishonest importer; to protect American pro-
ducers and dealers from the undervaluations and
frauds that had long been practiced upon them; to
take the business of importing out of the hands of
dishonest men and place it, as it once was^ in the
hands of honest agents^ factors, and merchants. It
looked strictly to the faithful collection of the im-
port duties justly due this country ; for it was notori-
ous that for years past, by an iniquitous system of
consignments and undervaluations, and the establish-
ment of foreign agencies on this side the Atlantic,
we had not collected by from one-fourth to one-half
the daty properly due the United States on the true
valuation of the goods and products imported. The
bill encountered strong opposition, but passed the House
on March 5th by a party vote — ^yeas (Republicans) 188,
nays (Democrats) 121. It was reported in the Senate,
on March 20th, and passed that body, as amended, on
May 8rd — ^yeas 85, all Republicans; nays 18, all
B^nocrats. The House refused to concur in the
Senate amendments, and the bill went to a Gonunittee
of Conference consisting of Senators Allison, Aldrich,
and McPherson, and Representatives McKinley,
Burrows, and Carlisle, who agreed upon a report that

104 THE TABIFF IN THE DAYS

was adopted by both houses, and the bill became a
law by the approval of the President on June 10,
1890. It was similar in its provisions to a bill in-
troduced in the Fiftieth Congress^ as the outgrowth
of a careful, non-partisan investigation by the Senate
Committee on Finance, and proved a wise and sal-
utary measure.

True to the demand of the Chicago platform, Mr.
Sherman introduced, as Senate Bill No. 1 of this Con-
gress, on January 14, 1890, a bill declaring the creation
of trusts and combinations in restraint of trade and pro-
duction was against public policy, and therefore unlaw-
ful and void. It was referred to the Committee on Fi-
nance, who, on March 18th, reported a substitute, which
in turn was much debated and amended, and then re-
ferred to the Committee on Judiciary with instructions
to report within thirty days — ^yeas thirty-one, nine Re-
publicans and twenty-two Democrats; nays twenty-
eight, six Democrats and twenty-two Republicans. This
substitute was entitled, ^^A bill to protect trade and
commerce against unlawful restraints and monopolies.^'
It was reported to the Senate on April 8th, and passed
that body by a vote of fifty-two yeas to one nay — ^Mr.
Blodgett, a Democrat, of New Jersey. The House con-
sidered the measure on May 1st, and after adding a sec-
tion, proposed by Mr. Bland, of Missouri, relative to
agreements to prevent competition, passed it without
division. The Senate amended Mr. Bland's amendment,
but the House refused to concur in its change, and Mr.
Ezra B. Taylor, of Ohio, Mr. Stewart, of Vermont, and
Mr. Bland were ap}K>inted a committee of conference on
the part of the House, and Mr. Edmunds, of Vermonty

OF HENBY CLAT AND SINGE. 105

Mr. Hoar, of Massachasetts, and Mr. Vest, of Missouri,
on part of the Senate. They reported an amendment
on Jane llth, Messrs. Bland and Vest not concurring,
but the report was rejected by the House — ^yeas twelve,
nays 115. Mr. Stewart moved that the House insist on
its disagreement and ask for a second committee of con-
ference, which was agreed to— yeas 106, all Republicans,
nays 98, all Democrats but one. The new committee
was the same as the old, except that Mr. Bland was
relieved by Hon. David B. Gulbertson, of Texas. They
recommended that both houses recede from their respec-
tive amendments (Senator Vest not signing the report),
and the report was adopted by the Senate without a
division, and by the House by a vote of yeas 242, nays
none, and eighty-five not voting. It was approved by
the President on July 2, 1890, and is important for the
precedent it established, as the initial legislation by
Congress in this field.

On April 29th, a bill was reported from the Ways
and Means Committee, by Mr. Dingley, to provide for
the classification of all worsteds as woolen cloths. It
met with but little open opposition and was passed by
the I^ouse on the day following. In the Senate the bill
was taken up on May 8th, and, after several futile at-
tempts at amendment, was passed — ^yeas thirty, all Be-
publicans except one; nay twenty, all Democrats.

On April 16th, Mr. McKinley, Chairman of the
Committee on Ways and Means, introduced the general
tariff bill, entitled, ^ A bill to reduce the revenue and
equalize the duty on imports, and for other purposes.'^
He offered the bill with the majority report^ while
Mr. Mills presented the views of himself and the other

106 THE TABIFF IN THE DAT8

Democratic members of the Committee, aad Mr.
McKenna submitted Ids own views upon the bounty
on sugar, upon which alone he dissented from his
Republican colleagues.

The bill had been for nearly four months under con-
stant consideration by the Ways and Means Committee,
duriag which period every interest in the country that
had asked for it had been given a hearing* Manu-
facturers, merchants, farmers. Grangers, members of
the Farmers' Alliance, agents, factors, wool-growers, —
freetraders and protectionists — all who presented them-
selves to the Committee were freely, fully, and patiently
heard. The minority party, equally with the majority
party, was given every facility to present its views, and
both those who opposed aad those who advocated the
bill were urged to present any testimony they could in
support of their respective positions. The measure
was brought up for discussion on May 7th, when it
was determined to limit general debate to four days, in
the Commiatee of the Whole, and then allow eight
days for consideration, section by section, under the
five-minutes rule.

It is impossible to attempt to follow this debate, or
even to intelligently summarize the numerous speeches
made during its progress. Perhaps, however, a fairly
good idea of the views of its friends may be gathered
from the following extracts from the report of the
Committee, namely :

^ The Committee on Ways and Means, to whom was
referred that part of the message of the President of
the United States relating to public revenues, have
carefully considered the subject, and report back the

OF HENBT CLAT AND 8IN0E. 107

acoompanying bill with a favorable recommendatioiL
We are adviBed from the annual report of the Secretary
of the Treasury that the ordinary revenues of the
Government, actual and estimated, for the fiscal year
ending June 80, 1890, will be $386,000,000, and that
the expenditures for the same period, actual and esti-
mated, will be $298,000,000, leaving a surplus of
492,000,000. The estimated amount required for the
linking fund will be $48,321,116, leaving an esti-
mated net surplus of $48,678,888. The excess of
revenues over expenses estimated for the fiscal year
ending June 80, 1891, we are advised from the same
source, will amount to $48,569,522.80, which, with the
amount of cash now on hand and available, reaching
nearly $90,000,000, the Committee believe, will justify a
reduction of the revenue in the sum contemplated by
this bilL

^^It ih framed in the interest of the people of the
United States. It is for the better defense of American
homes and American industries. While securing the
needed revenue, its provisions look to the occupations
of our own people, their comfort and their welfare ; to
the successful prosecution of industrial enterprises
-already started, and to the opening of new lines of
production where our conditions and resources will
^^Imit. Ample revenues for the wants of the Govern-
inent are provided by this bill, and every reasonable
encouragement is given to productive enterprises and to
the labor employed therein. The aim has been to
^pose duties upon such foreign products as compete
with our own, whether of the soil or the shop, and to
'^K^laige the free list wherever this can be done without

108 THS TABIFF IN THE DATO

injury to any American industry, or wherever an
existing home industry can be helped without det-
riment to another industry which is equally worthy of
the protecting care of the Government

^^The Committee believe that, inasmuch as nearly
$300,000,000 are annually required to meet the ex-
penses of the Government, it is wiser to tax those
foreign products which seek a market here in competi*
tion with our own than to tax our domestic products
or the non-competing foreign products. The Committee,
responding as it believes to the sentiment of the country
and the recommendations of the President, submit what
they consider to be a just and equitable revision of the
tariff, which, while preserving that measure of protec-
tion which is required for our industrial independence,
will secure a reduction of the revenue both from customs
and internal revenue sources. We have not looked
alone to a reduction of the revenue, but have kept
steadily in view the interests of our producing classes,
and have been ever mindful of that which is due to our
political conditions, our labor and the character of our
citizenship. We have realized that a reduction of
duties below the difference between the cost of labor
and production in competing countries and our own
would result either in the abandonment of much of our
manufacturing here or in the depression of our labor.
Either result would bring disaster the extent of which
no one can measure. We have recommended no duty
above the point of difference between the normal cost
of production here, including labor, and the cost of
like production in the countries which seek our mar-
kets, nor have we hesitated to give this measuro of

OF HENBY CLAY AND SIKOE. 109

duty even though it involved an increase over present
rates and showed an advance of percentages and ad
valorem equivalents. We have not sought to make a
uniform rate of duty upon all imported articles. This
would have been manifestly unjust and inequitable.
We possess advantages in some branches of production
which offset the necessity for the highest duties, and
these have been fully recognized in the arrangement
and adjustment of rates. The labor cost of any two
manufactured products which may be mentioned is not
the same^ one being largely the product of machinery
and the other largely the product of hand labor, and
therefore, while one product requires one rate of duty
for protection, another product may require another
and different one to afford equal protection. We have
sought to look at the conditions of each industry at
home and its relations to foreign competition, and pro-
vide for that duty which would be adequate in each
case.

*^ The Committee have already reported and the
House passed a bill for the revision of the administra-
tive features of the customs law, which will remedy
many of the evils and inconveniences now existing.
For the purpose' of convenient reference each distinct
paragraph in the schedules of the bill is numbered.
This has been done heretofore in the editions of the
tariff issued by the Treasury Department, but has not
had legislative sanction.

*^ The present provision in the free list for * articles
imported for the use of the United States, provided
that the price of the same did not include the duty/ is
omitted in the proposed revision. It has been produc-

no THE TABIFF IK THE DAYS

tive of fraud and has resulted in other serious abuses.
Persons having contracts with the United States, under
color of the law, have fraudulently imported lai^e
quantities of material for sale with a resulting loss to
the revenue. The provision also works injury to our
own people by inviting foreign competition in the mat-
ter of Government contracts. The remission of duty
in such cases is in effect a premium offered the foreigner
to compete with the honest importer who pays duty^
as also with the domestic producer. It is unwise to
remit duties when the money goes neither into the
public treasury nor the pockets of our own people, but
to enrich their foreign competitors. The Government
ought not to buy abroad what it can buy at home.
Nor should it be exempted from the laws it imposes
upon its citizens. The United States gains nothing
while the citizen loses by this provision. These con*
siderations, it is believed, warrant the proposed change.

^^ Section five forbids entry to merchandise not
plainly marked, stamped, branded, or labeled in l^ble
English words, with the name of the country in which
it is manufactured, with the purpose of protecting both
our own people from the imposition of inferior goods
and the revenue from possible loss through undervalua-
tion.

^^ Section 17 is a modification of section 2496, Revised
Statutes. The present section provides that articles in
violation of r^stered trademark shall not be admitted
to entry. It does not prohibit their importation or pre-
scribe their forfeiture, and the result is that such goods
can only be taken possession of by the collector as un-
claimed, retained the required length of time, and sold.

OF HENBY CLkY AST) SINCE. Ill

which course -seoores their distribution in this country
in direct contravention of the intent of the statute.
The domestic interests sought to be protected are thus
compelled to buy them up in order to protect them-
selves. It is proposed by this amendment to admit
such articles to entry for exportation only within three
months of their importation ; otherwise that they be for-
feited. The admitted superiority of certain lines of
American goods has induced the importation of foreign
imitations of inferior quality, with American brands^
to be put on our market as the superior goods of Amer-
ican manufacture. Inferior goods, the manufacture of
one coimtry, have also been imported and sold bearing
the marks of the superior manufacturers of established
reputation of another country. A practice has also
grown up of importing goods imder invoices authenti-
cated in a country other, and in a currency of less
value, than of the country of manufacture.

^ Section 22 provides for a uniform rate of drawback
on manufactured articles exported or articles on which
duty has been paid, of the amount paid less one per
cent, for expenses. Heretofore the rate has varied on
different articles In some cases the entire duty has
been refunded and in others the duty less ten per cent.
The Government ought to be re-imbursed the expenses
involved in the transaction, and it is believed this will
be done by the retention of one per cent

'^Section 24 contains an important provision never
before enacted in any American tariff law. It declares
that all goods, wares, articles and merchandise manu-
ffustured wholly or in part in any foreign country by
convict labor shall not be entitled to entry at any

lia THE TABIFF IN THE DAYS

of the ports of the United States, and the importation
theieof is hereby prohibited, and the Secretary of the
Treasury is authorized to prescribe such regulations as
may be necessary for the enforcement of this pro-
vision.

^^Many drugs and chemicals which are not pro-
duced in the United States have been placed on the
free list. These chemicals are chiefly used in manu-
facturing industries. The recommendation that they
be made free will reduce the cost in the manufactures
of which they form a part, and it is believed by
the CSommittee will result in a benefit to the consumer.
The amount of duty remitted by placing these articles
on the free list is the sum of $876,804.

*' The rates of duty upon earthen and China ware have
not been materially changed. The existing duties have
resulted in the establishment of large manufacturing
plants with great benefit to the consumer. This ware
has been cheapened to the people under the advance of
duty in 1888, and a continuance of the duty is believed
to be essential to the maintenance of this industry and
will secure still greater benefits to the consumer. An
increase of duty has been recommended upon glass-
ware. This is believed to be necessary to compensate
for the difference in the cost of labor here and in
competing countries, and to protect our industries from
destructive foreign competition.

'^ By the proposed bill the duties on first and second
class wools are made eleven and twelve cents a pound,
as against ten and twelve under existing law. On
third-class wool, costing twelve cents or less, the duty
is raised from 2^ cents a pound to 8^ cents, and

OF HIBKBT OLAT AKD SINCE. 113

upon wools of the third class costing above twelve
cents, the duty recommended is an advance from five to
eight cents per poimd. The bill which passed the
Senate in 1888 made the dividing line on third-class
wools at twelve cents with the same rates of duty upon
all classes of wool except third-class costing less
than twelve cents, as herein recommended The Senate
fixed the duty upon that grade at four cents, while the
Committee recommended 3^ cents. It is believed,
however, that with the restrictions, definitions, and
classifications, and the addition of port charges to the
foreign cost recommended in the proposed bill, this dif-
ference will be fully compensated. The United States
ought to produce all of the wool it consumes, and will
with adequate encouragement and defensive legislation.
The amount of wool consumed in all forms and for all
purposes, is nearly, if not quite, 600,000,000 pounds an-
nually. In January, 1889, there were in the country
42,599,079 sheep, producing about 245,000,000 pounds
of unwashed wool, while the imports for the last fiscal
year in all forms, wool, clothing, and carpet, is estimated
ftt about 950,000,000 pounds. There were imported of
clothing wools 29,224,522 pounds ; of combed wools
6,871,666 pounds, and of carpet wools, so-called, 90,391,-
541 pounds; of waste, 8,662,209 pounds — ^practically
scoured wools ; and the value of woolen aind worsted
goods imported was $52,564,942, representing about
160,000,000 pounds of wool. A considerable amount
of wool was imported as carpet wool, at a duty of
only 2^ cents a pound, which was used in the manu-
facture of clothing, and should have paid the clothing
Vid higher wool duty. There seems to be ho doubt

lU THE TABIFV IN THE DATO

that with the protection afforded by the increased
duties recommended in the biU, the farmers of the
United States will be able at an early day to supply
substantially all of the home demand, and the great
benefit such production will be to the agricultural
interests of the country can not be estimated. The
production of 600,000,000 pounds of wool- would
require about 100,000,000 sheep, or an addition of more
than 100 per cent, to the present number. It will be
noticed that in 1860, after foufteen years of revenue
tariff the total production of domestic wool was
60,264:,913 pounds, or 1.7 pounds per capita, while in
1884:, after twenty-four years of protection, the total
production had increased to 308,000,000 pounds, or 5.4
pounds per capita. This increase justifies the policy of
affording this important agricultural product adequate
protection. The bill seeks to stop the frauds which
have been so shamelessly practiced in the past in
violation not only of the spirit but the letter of the
law. The preparation of wools under new names and
forms, to avoid legal duties, has been very generally
practiced. Noils, ring waste, gameted waste, slubbing
waste, carbonated waste, roping and roving, have been
imported into this country at the duty on unwashed
wool, when they were in fact washed and scoured,
partly oianufactured and ready to go into our looms.
It is believed that if . the provisions of this bill be
adopted these violations will be prevented and this
gross injustice to the wool growers of our country
remedied.

^The increase of the duty on clothing wool and sub-
stitutes for wool to protect the wool growers of this

OF HEITBT CULY AND BINGE. 115

countiy, and the well tmdarstood fact that the tariff of
1863y and the constmction given to the worsted dause,
Tednced the duties on many grades of woolen goods to
a point that invited increasing importations, to the
serious injury of our. woolen manufacturers and wool
growers, neces^tates raising the duties on woolen jam,
cloth, and dress goods to a point which will insure l^e
holding of our home market for these manufactures to a
mach greater extent than is now possible. The necessity
of this increase is apparent in view of ihe fact already
stated that during the last fiscal year there were imports
of manufactures of wool of the foreign value of
$52,681,482, as shown by the under-vidued invoices,
and the real value in our market of nearly $90,000,000
— ^fuUy one-fourth of our entire home consumption-^
equivalent to an import of at least 160,000,000 pounds
of wool in the form of manufactured goods. In revising
the woolen gobds schedule so as to afford adequate pro-
tection to our woolen manu&cturers and wool growers,
we have continued the system of compound duties
which have proved to be so essential in any tariff which
protects wool, providing first for a specific compensatory
pound or square yard duty, equivalent to the duty
which would be paid on the wool if imported, for the
benefit of the wool grower, and an ad valorem duty of
from 30 to 50 per cent, according to the proportion of
labor required in the manufacture of the several classes
of goods, as a protection to the manufacturer again^^t
foreign competition and ten per cent, additional upon
ready-made clothing for the protection o^ the clothing
manufacturers. The existing tariff gives an ad valorem
duty of from thirty-five to forty-five per cent for tiie

U6 THE TABIFF IN THE DAYS

protection of the woolen manufacturer, and the bill
which passed the House at the first session of the
Fiftieth Congress which abolished all duties on wool
and consequently the equivalent specific compensatory
duties on manufactures of wool, gave a uniform duty of
forty per cent, on all woolen goods without regard to
their character. This duty is more than is required for
unfinished goods like cheap blankets and flannels^ and
less than is requisite for fine finished manufactures of
wool, which are being imported in so large quantities.
For this reason, and to adapt the duties to the compara-
tive cost of manufacturing different woolen fabrics, we
have given thirty per cent, to the lowest grade of
blankets and flannels, thirty-five per cent, to the medium
{grades, forty per cent, to the highest grades of blankets
(fliannels valued about fifty cents per pound being
classed as ^' dress goods,'' which they practically are),
carpets and the lower grades of finished doth and
cotton* warp dress goods, and fifty per cent, to the finer
grades of finished cloth and to all-wool dress goods,
requiring the highest skill and greatest amount of labor.
These advanced rates on the better grades of goods for
the protection of the manu£EM3turers, with specific duties
fully compensatory for the duties on wool, wiU, it is
believed, have the effect to largely diminish importa-
tions of manufactures of wool, and consequently to
reduce the revenue instead of increasing the revenue as
would be the case if the importation should continue
the same. From the best information we can obtain, it
is probable that the increased rates of* duty given to
manufactures of woolens will reduce, certainly not
increase^ the revenue from this source, and transfer to

OF H£NBT CLAT AND 8IN0JB. 117

this country the manufacture of from $16,000,000 to
$20,000,000 of woolen goods now made abroad.

^ In the metal schedule no change of duty has been
recommended upon iron ore or iron in pigs. These
dutiea, it is believed, can not be lowered without detri-
ment to existing industries, and we have not felt justi-
fied in interfering with the further development of our
iron ore resources^ now so promising, in the Southern
States. With regard to pig iron, it may be said that it
is in no sense a raw. material It is a product of the
highest skill, requiring for its manufacture large and
expensive plants, the capital invested in which in our
country to-day more than equals that which is invested
in any other branch of our iron and steel industries.
Pig-iron is made in twenty-five. States of the Union.
Its manufacture is increasing rapidly in many States,
largely as the result of the protective. duty which has
long given encouragement to its production. It has
had a marvelously rapid growth in the Southern and
Western States in the last ten years, and it is to-day the
leading mauu&cturing industry south of the Potomac
and Ohio rivers. It has been the most potent of all
influences in the industrinl rehabilitation of the South.
To reduce the duty on pig-iron, and on scrap-iron and
scrap-steel, which are substitutes for pig-iron, would an-
nually bring into our ports many shiploads of these pro-
ducts to take the. place of pig-iron which could be pro-
duced at home, and it would correspondingly reduce the
demand for coal and iron ore. This is a result which is
surely not to be desired.

^' There has been an increase of duties upon cutlery,
believed by the Committee to be absolutely necessary

118 THE TARIFF IS THE DATS

to the maintenance of this industry in the United States.
The competition from Germany and other countries has
been so ruinous as to have already destroyed some of
the manufactures, and threatens without this increased
duty to wipe out the remaining ones.

^ It has been demonstrated that we can manufacture
tin plate in the United States as successfully as it can
be done in England. Its production here suitable for
all uses is no longer experimental We make sheet
iron and sheet steel, and it is confidently believed that
we have in the Dakotas pig tin in sufficient quantities
for use in making all of the tin required for this market;
and if this were not so, pig tin is on the free list, accessi-
ble to our people for manufacturing purposes. There
is no reason except inadequate protection why we are
not to-day manufacturing the more than $21,000,000
worth of tin now imported into the United States and
upon which we pay an annual duty of over $7,000,000.
It is estimated that the establishment of an industry
which would supply otu* own market in this particular
would furnish steady employment to at least twenty
four thousand men. The bill provides that the in-
creased duties shall not go into effect until July 1,
1891, and it Is believed that manufacturers, encouraged
by this proposed legislation in the meantime, will adapt
their plants to the new production, and that in the end
the advanced duty will not enhance the cost to the con-
sumer, but eventuate in lower and steadierprices to the
American consumer. To the end that there may be no
interruption of our export trade of canned products by
reason of the proposed change, the Committee recom-
piend that upon tin imported and exported, made up.

OF Hia^BY CLAY AND 8IN0X. 119

the Oovemment shall retain but one per cent, of the
duty instead of ten per cent., as provided by existing
jaw. If the recommendation of the Committee is
adopted, it is believed a new and important industry
will be secured to the United States, with large result-
ant benefits to the people.

^ The Committee recommend that sugar up to and in-
cluding No. 16 Dutch standard in color, and molasses,
be placed on the free list, with a duty of four-tenths of
one cent per pound on refined sugar above No. 16 ; and
that a bounty of two cents per pound be paid from the
Treasury for a period of fifteen years for all sugar
pcdarizing at least 85 d^rees, made in this country from
cane, beets, or soighum produced in the United States.
In 1888 the consumption of sugar in the United States
was 1,469,997 tons, or 58.1 pounds per inhabitant. Of
this only 189,814 tons (375,004,197 pounds) were pro-
duced in the United States, and 1,:280,188 tons, or
seven-eighths of our consumption, were imported. We
have not at hand the statistics of sugar consumption and
production for 1889, but the relative proportion of
domestic to foreign production was substantially the
aame. So laige a pix>portion of our sugar is imported
that the home production of sugar does not materially
affect the price, and the duty is therefore a tax, which
is added to the price not only of the imported but of
the domestic product, which is not true of duties im-
posed on articles produced or made here, substantially
to the extent of our wants. In 1889 the duties collected
on imported sugar and molasses amounted to $55,975,-
610* Add to this the increase of price of domestic
sugar arising from the duty, and it is clear that the

IM THE TABIFF IN THE DATS

duty on sugar and molasses made the cost of the sugar
and molasses consumed by the people of this country at
least $64,000,000, or about one dollar for each man,
woman and child in the United States, more than it
would have been if no such duties had been levied and
the domestic product had remained the same. Even on
the assumption that, with proper encouragement, we
shall eventually be able to produce all, or nearly all,
the sugar required for the consumption of our people —
an assumption which your Committee believes to be
sustained by many facts» notwithstanding the slow prog-
ress thus far made in sugar culture in this country.
This encouragement can be given much more economi-
cally and effectively by a bounty of two cents per pound^
involving the expenditure of but a little more than
$7,000,000 per annum with the present production of
sugar in this country, than by the imposition of a duty
involving the collection of $55,975,610 in duties in the
last fiscal year, not to mention the amount directly iur
volved. When it is considered that this increase in cost
due to the duty on sugar falls on an article of prime
necessity as food, your Committee are persuaded that
justice as well as good policy requires that such an un-
necessary burden in the way of a direct tax should be
removed from sugar, and that the encouragement
required to induce the production of sugar in the
United States should be given through a bounty rather
than by an import duty. In providing that not only raw
sugar, but also sugar up to and including No. 16
shall be admitted free of duty, an opportunity is given
for the free introduction of yellow sugar suited for
family use, an arrangement which will secure to our

OF HXNBY CLAT AND SINGE. 191

people sugar at the lowest price existing in the markets
of the worldy^ while even imported white refined sugars
will be subject to a dnty of only four-tenths of one cent
per pound,

*^ The free list has been enlarged by the addition of
the following articles: Books and pamphlets printed
exclusively in languages other than English ; books and
music in raised letters printed exclusively for the blind;
braids, plaits, laces, flats; bristles, raw ; chicory root, raw,
dried, or undried, but unground ; coal tar, crude, and
pitch of coal tar ; dandelion roots, raw, dried or unground,
acorns, bees wax ; floor matting manufactured from round
or split straw, including what is commonly known as
Chinese matting; currants, Zante and other; dates;
grass and fibers; jute; jute butts; maniUa; sisal-grass;
Sunn and all other textile grasses of fibrous vegetable
substance, unmanufSactured ; degras and other grease;
hair, human, raw, uncleaned, and not drawn; molasses;
needles, hand, sewing, and darning; nut oil or oil of
nuts ; olive-oil for manufacturing and mechancial pur-
poses, unfit for eating; opium, unmanufactured; ore,
nickel ; potash, crude or black salts, chlorate of, nitrate
of crude, sulphate of crude ; red earth or raddle, used
for polishing lenses; seeds; hemp, rope, bulbs, bulbous
roots, not edible ; shotguns, barrel or barrels, rough or
bored; sponges; sugar up to and including No. 16
Dutch standard in color ; tar and pitch of wood ; tinsel
wire, lame or lahn; tobacco stems; sulphur ore, as
pyrites or sulphuret of iron containing an excess of
sulphur; turpentine, spirits of; and briar- wood, manu-
factured.

'^The Committee have given months of investigation

laa THE TABIFF IN THS DATB

to tfaa existing conditions of agricultnre and matters
connected therewith. This great industry is foremost
in magnitude and importance in our country. Its suc-
cess and prosperity are vital to the Nation. No pros-
perity is possible to other industries if agriculture
languishes. In so far as the fostering care of the
Government can be helpful, it must be faithfully and
forcefully exerted to build up and strengthen agri-
cultura That there is wide spread depression in this
industry to-day can not be doubted. Every remedy
within the scope of practical legislation known to your
Goomiittee has been recommended in the proposed
measure to meet the urgent requirements of the situa-
tion. The enemies of the protective system have no
word of criticism for the real causes of agricultural de-
pression, no suggestion of relief from the real burdens
which are weighing it down to-day; but, seizing the
present as a favorable time, they solemnly charge that
the decline in our market is solely due to the tariff.
They are pleased to ignore the fact that one of the
purposes of a protective tariff is to hinder a still larger
importation of foreign produce, and thus save the
market from still greater depression. The friends of
larger foreign importations • feel no apprehension or
alarm at the rapidly increasing volume of foreign agri-
cultural produce pouring into our markets. These and
all other actual perils they pass by. They are silent to
this danger which offers real harm to American agri-
culture and clamor against its only safeguard and pro-
tection. But your Committee, sensible to the importance
of this industry, prompted by the single motive to lift
it to the highest level of profitable employment, believe

OF HSKBY GLAT AND SINGE. 183

that they offer in the bill presented, all the relief
which tariff legislation can give to it. A critical ex-
amination of the subject will show that agriculture is
suffering chiefly from a most damaging foreign competi-
tion in our home market. The increase in importations
of agricultural products since 1850 has been enormous,
amounting from $40,000,000 to more than $866,000,000,
in 1889. This is an increase of nearly 900 per cent,
while the population increased for the same period less
than 800 per cent. During the past ten years this
growth in importation has been most rapid, and has
been marked by a. significant and corresponding decline
in prices of the home*grown product Upon the prod-
ucts of chief reliance to our farmers, competition, not
only abroad but at home, with the poorly-paid labor of
Europe and cheap labor of Egypt and India, is depriv-
ing our produce markets and sweeping the margins of
profits from the farmers of the country. The ^^ world's
market,*^ to which the advocates of tariff for revenue
only invite the farmers of this country, is to-day
crowded with the products of the cheapest human labor
the earth affords. All over the Old World thero is a
rush of their surplus to that market, and it is to such a
contest as this that free trade would allure American
agriculture. With the foreign grain market under the
sway of such oppressive competition, with the foreign
cattle and pork market depressed and obstructed by
various ruinous measures of restriction, with foreign
^^cultural products crowding our home market, your
C!ommittee have recommended an increase of rates upon
agricultural products. The establishment of agricul-
tural experiment stations under Federal supervision,

lU THE TARIFF IK THE DAYS

the energetic research into the resources of the different
sections of the countryi the application of scientific
principles to agricnltnre under the efficient administrar
tion of the Department of Agriculture, make this a
most opportune time to encourage and foster, by the
application of the protective principle, the development
of new industries on the farm.

^ We advance the rates upon the products of the
soil which either do supply or can be brought to sup-
ply the home consumption. Horses, cattle, hogs, sheep,
bacon, barley, beans, peas, beef, mutton, pork, buck-
wheat, butter, cheese, eggs, hay, hops, milk, poultry,
flax-seedy v^tables, potatoes, flax, hemp, hides, wool,
tobacco, and many other products are advanced with a
view to save this entire market to the American fanner.
As indicating the general line of policy pursued in
changing rates in this schedule your Committee can
only, in the scope of this report, note a few articles
illustrative of alL In the last ten years not less than
$60,000,000 worth of horses, cattle and sheep, ordinary
marketable stock, has been imported. A portion of
these have paid twenty per cent ad valorem on a
fraudulent undervaluation. A very large proportion
have come in free, professedly for breeding purposes,
actually for the common markets. The duty has been
changed to a specific rate and advanced to a point
where it will protect the market, while the paragraph
in the free list on animals for breeding purposes is so
framed as to only admit animals which are pure bred
and properly registered. Ten years ago the cultivation
of tobacco suitable for cigars promised one of the most
certain and profitable investments for agriculture in

OF HSNBY CLAY AND SINGE. 185

many of the Northern States. To^ay the industry is
crowded from its own market by foreign importations
produced by labor costing less than ten cents per day.
The value of the tobacco imported from The Nether-
lauds alone for the six months ending December 81st
last was nearly $5,000,000. The duty has been in-
creased with a view of protecting the American market
for the American grower. Flax and hemp have been
advanced upon the positive evidence that the time has
come to encourage these two industries from an agricul*
toral standpoint. The farmers themselves are ready
to enter largely upon the cultivation of flax and hemp
fiber under adequate protection. The diversity of our
soil and climate beyond question invites us to the
establishment of these industries. Samples of every
grade of American grown flax, from the coarsest to the
finest, have been examined by your Committee, and
they are convinced that if the production of the fiber
and the weaving of the fabric be given a fair measure
of protection against the low wages paid in the several
flax-growing countries of Europe, a few years will build
up an immense industry in the United States of in-
estimable beneflt to agriculture.

'* The Committee have recommended changes in the
internal revenue laws as follows : Abolishing the tax
on dealers in leaf tobacco, which will relieve 4,872 tax-
payers and reduce the revenues $48,570.88; abolishing
the tax on dealers in manufactured tobacco, which will
relieve 590,013 tax-payers from the payment of a small
but vexatious tax, and will reduce the revenue $1,280,-
015.98 ; abolishing the tax on manufacturers of tobacco,
which will relieve 902 tax-payers and reduce the rev-

1S6 THE TABIFF IK THE DATS

ehue $6^128.25 ; aboluhing the tax on manofacturera of
cigars, which will relieve 20,684 tax-payers and reduoe
the revenue $120,195.58 ; abolishing the tax on ped*
dlers of tobacco, which will relieve 16,060 tax-payers
and reduce the revenue $127,010.88. The Committee
recommend a reduction of the tax on smoking and man*
ufactured tobacco from eight cents to four cents per
pound, which will effect a reduction of the revenue of
$8,588,449.97 ; snuff from eight cents to four cents per
pound, which will effect a reduction of the revenue of
$822,544.78 ; and the abolition of the tax on retail
dealers in leaf tobacco, effecting a reduction of the rev*^
enue of $270.84. They have recommended that all
provisions of the statutes imposing restrictions of an7
kind whatsoever upon farmers and growers of tobacco,
in regard to the sale thereof, be repealed. This will
enable the fiGoaners and planters to sell their tobacco
wherever and to whomsoever they please with the same
freedom they now dispose of other agricultural prod-
ucts. They have been advised by the Commissioner
of Internal Revenue that the abolition of the special
taxes herein proposed can be made with safety and will
in no way interfere with the administration of the law»
which are to remain.

<<The advance of duties on agricultural products, in*
eluding tobacco and wool and manufactures of wool
and sundries, on the supposition that the imports of the
next fiscal year would be as lai^ as in the year ending
June 80, 1889, would increase the revenue. But the
articles on which duties have been increased are for the
most part such as we can produce to the extent of our
wants, and the increase of duties will have the effect to^

OF HSNBY CLAY AND BINGE. 187

dimiiuBh the importations to each an extent that the
revenne will not be increased. No other result can f ol«
low. The effect of the advance of duties on agricult*
ural products^ for example, will be to hold our own
markets in larger measure than at present for our own
farmers without any increase in the revenue. The same
result will follow in other cases of increase, and where
the revenue ia in special cases increased this increase
will be far less than is indicated by a computation
based on the theory that importations of such articles
will continue as large as under lower duties. In the
case of manufactures of wool, where the importations
liave been enormous because of inadequate duties, there
can be no reasonable doubt that the rates of duty pro-
posed will diminish rather than increase the revenue.
Your Committee conelude, therefore, that ike proposed
bill, if enacted into law, will certainly reduce the rev^
enue from imports at least $60,986,536, and probably
more, and from the internal revenue $10,827,878, or in
the aggregate $71,264,41^*''

In reply to this report, Mr. Mills offered the views of
the minority, which were in part as follows :

^ At a time when it is confessed by all parties that
the Government does not need additional revenue, but
that there ought to be a reduction of its receipts, the
bill reported hy the majority proposes to levy upon a
great many articles of absolute necessity higher rates of
duty than were ever heretofore proposed in any meas-
ure reported to Congress. These increases of rates are
made in every instance for the purpose of restricting
trade and thereby affording what is called protection to
the producers of similar articles in this country. The

US THE TARIFF IK THE DA18

original argument in favor of protective duties was that
they were necessary to foster infant industries by pre-
venting ruinous competition from abroad until they
could secure a hold on the home market and thus be-
come self-sustaining, and it was again and again pre-
dicted by the earlier advocates of the system that a few
years of public support would enable them to do this.
But the present bill is based upon precisely the oppo-
site view. It is framed upon the assumption that as
our industries grow older they grow weaker and more
dependent upon the bounty of the Government and the
forced contributions of the people who purchase and
consume their products ; and accordingly we find that,
as a general rule, the important increases in the rates of
duty are made with a view of still further protecting^
the products of our oldest industries, such as manufac-
tures of iron and steel, woolen goods, cotton goods,
manufactures of flax, hemp, etc. If it be true that these
old industries need more protection now than they
needed a hundred years ago, it must be because they
have been existing undel* an unnatural and unhealthy
system and have lost that spirit of self-reliance and in-
dependence which is essential to the permanent growth
and prosperity of every business enterprise. Thirty
years ago, after a considerable period of low taxes upon
imported goods, when it was proposed to increase rates
in order to secure revenue, it was not suggested by the
most extreme advocates of the protective system that
our industries required anything like such high rates of
duty as are imposed by this bill.

'^ For instance, there are a few persons in this country
trho believe that they could manufacture tin or teme

OF HENBY CLAY AND SINCE. 129

plate if those who use that necessary article were com-
pelled by law to pay a higher tax upon it, and accord*
ingly the bill now reported proposes to more than
double the duties. This will injuriously affect the
interests of thousands of laborers now engaged in the
manufacture of tin cans and other vessels used in
canning fruit, rotables, meats, and fish, in nearly
every part of the country^ and it will constitute a direct
charge upon the producers and consumers of those
various kmds of food ; but the theory upon which this
bill is based takes no account of the welfare of this
great mass of American citizens so long as two or
three firms or corporations insist that the tax will be
beneficial to them.

'^ At the same time the bill proposes to make enor-
mous increases in the rates on woolen goods, which all
our people are compelled to purchase and use, and very
laige increases in the rates on some kinds of cotton and
linen goods which are absolutely necessary for the
health and comfort of all classes. The increase of
taxes on wool and woolen and worsted goods, including
carpets, amounts to about |il5,500,000 per annum, esti-
mated upon the importations of the last fiscal year ; but
in fact it will be many times that amount by reason
of the enhanced prices which consumers will be com-
pelled to pay for the domestic product. While the bill
proposes to make this large addition to the tax on woolen
clothing and carpets, it also proposes to abolish the
internal revenue taxes to the amount of $8,860,994.75
on manufactured chewing and smoking tobacco and
snuff, articles which certainly can not be classed among
the necessaries of life. While we would be willing

180 THE TABIFF IN THE DAYS

to repeal the internal revenue taxes on tobacco in con-
nection with the reductions upon other articles which
the people are obliged to use, as was proposed in the
bill which passed the last House, we can not agree to a
measure which provides for the abolition of any part of
such taxes and at; the same time increases the rates of
duty of cotton, woolen, and linen clothing, and on
earthenware, glassware, table cutlery, and many forms
of iron and steel which can not be dispensed with.
^ We can not undertake here to point out in detail the
numerous increases in the rates of duty on imported
goods which this bill proposes to make, but a few will
suffice to show the general character of the measure
and the purpose of its authors and supporters. The
lowest grades of woolen yarn, worth not over 80 cents
per pound, are to be subjected to a duty of 112 per
cent, while the most costly yarn will pay 72 per cent.
One grade of coarse, cheap blankets will be required to
pay 106 per cent but the finest blankets will pay 72
per cent. The coarsest and cheapest woolen hats will
be subject to a duty of 111 per cent, and the finest
to 66 per cent. Women^s and children's cheapest dress
goods with cotton warp are to be taxed 106 per cent,
and the finest 73 per cent The lowest grade of woolen
cloths will pay 125 per cent, and the highest grade
86 per cent The cheapest qualities of knit goods for
undei*wear range from 112 to 138 per cent but the
finest and most expensive will pay 78 percent Woolen
shawls of the coarest and lowest grade used by the
poorest people, will pay 185 per cent duty, and worsted
goods of the lowest grade will pay 180 per cent while
the highest grade will pay 90 per cent.

OF HENBY CLAY AND SINCE. 131

'^ There are many increases of the rates on iron and
steel and scarcely any reduction on articles which can
be imported at all under the existing rates. The re-
dactions in this schedule^ .as a .general rule, will not
diminish taxation to any appreciable extent, while all
the increases are so arranged as to obstruct importations
and enhance the prices of the domestic articles of the
same kind. On common table cutlery the new rates of
duty imposed by this bill are very largely in excess of
the old ones under which our manufacturing establisht
ments have been successfully earned on for many years,
and on the cheaper grades of pocket knives, and razors
especially, the rates are greatly increased.

^When the existing tariff was enacted in 1888,
large increases were made in the rates of duty on earth-
enware and glassware, and this was justified upon the
groxmd that the law then passed abolished the duty
upon the packages in which these articles were shipped
into this country ; and it was contended that in view of
this fact the actual net increase of duty would be com-
paratively small. Experience has shown, however, that
notwithstanding the abolition of the duty on packages
there was a large increase of taxation in this schedule
under that act, and therefore there ought now to be a
reduction even if the packages remain free. But at the
present session of Congress a bill has passed the House,
and is now pending in the Senate, reimposing the du-
ties on the packages, and the bill reported by the major-
ity proposes to make still further increases in the rates
of duty upon the goods, especially upon glass and glass-
ware. Common window glass, not exceeding 16 by 24
inches square, is increased to 128 per cent; not exceed-

139 THE TABIFF IK THE DATS

ing 34 by 80 inches square is raised to over 185 per
cent and all sizes above that are raised to over 188 per
cent, while there are very large increases upon bottles
and various other manufactures of glasa

^'Gamers hair, a raw material extensively used in this
country in the manufacture of certain kinds of goods,
and which has been admitted free of duty for a great
many years, is by this bill taken from the free list and
subjected to a tax of twelve cents per pound, which is
equivalent to 77 per cent ad valorem. During the last
fiscal year we imported, free of duty,* 6,648,097 pounds
of this material, which is absolutely necessary to enable
some of our manufacturing establishments to carry on
their business and supply the goods they are now mak-
ing for their customers ; but if this bill passes and the
same quantity is imported next year it will cost thf^
people $797,771.64 in addition to the value of the hair
itseli

^^The bill proposes to make large increases in the
duties on carpels wools, and take silver ores containing
lead from the free list and subject the lead contained in
the silver ore to a duty of 1^ cents per pound, not
because we need the revenue, but for the sole purpose
of preventing these articles from being imported into
this country. Last year we imported direct from the
States and Republics of Central and South America
and the Republic of Meidco many million pounds of
this wool, and still more by way of London and other
European ports, and from Mexico silver ores bearing
lead of the value of $6,779,160, Our total importations
of carpet wools from all countries amounted to 96,556,-
466 pounds, and our total importation of this kind of ore

OF HSNBY CLAY AND 8IN0K ^ 188

was $6,951y719. All this wool has been converted into
carpets and other fabrieSy and all these ores have been
smelted in the United States by American workmen,
and their importation has been of great benefit to onr
people, in addition to the profit realized from the trade
between the different countries. The free admission of
fluxing ores from Mexico has enabled our citizens to
establish and maintain large smelting works at El Paso,
Texas, Argentine, Kansas, Newark, N. J., Kansas City,
Mo., and a great many other places. If this bill passes
the tax upon 66,000 tons of silver ore, the amount im-
ported last year, will be over $672,000, which the Gov-
ernment does not need and which will benefit nobody
in this country. The bill in fact increases the rates of
duty on all classes of wool imported into this country.
"For the further purpose of inducing the far-
mers of the countiy to believe that they can and
will derive some benefit from the protective policy,
this bill imposes various rates of duty upon certain
important agricultural products, which it is well
known could not be imported to any material extent
with or without duty. For instance, com is subjected
to a duty of 15 cents a bushel ; com meal, 20 cents per
bushel; oats, 15 cents per bushel; rye, 10 cents per
bushel; wheat, 25 cents per bushel; wheat flour, 25
per cent ad valorem ; apples, green or ripe, 25 cents
per bushel; apples, dried, 2 cents per pound; bacon
and hams, 5 cents per pound ; bee^ mutton, and pork,
2 cents per pound ; lard, 2 cents per pound, and tallow,
1 cent per pound. We produce a great surplus of all
these articles and many others every year, which we are
compelled to send abroad and sell in the free markets

IS4 THE TABIFF IN THE DATS

of the world in competition with similar products of
other countries. It is impossible to protect the farmer
against foreign competition in his home market, for he
has no such competition, and the insertion or retention
of these articles in a tariff bill is a device which will de-
ceive no one who gives a moment^s thought to the
subject.

'^ Under the existing law animals for breeding pur-
poses are admitted free of duty and all others are sub-
ject to a tax of 20 per cent, ad valorem ; but the bill re-
ported proposes lai^ely to increase this tax and make it
specific. It is proposed to levy an import duty of $30
per head on all horses and mules; $10 per head on all
cattle over one year old, and $2 per head on all under
that age, and $1.50 per head on hogs and sheep.
Horses^ valued at $150 and over, will pay a duty of 30
per cent, and all animals imported especially for breed*
ing purposes will still be admitted free, but they must
be of pure blood, of a recognized breed, and mtist have
been duly registered abroad in the book of records es-
tablished for that breed. All these increases of duties
are claimed to be in the interest of farmers, but in fact
they will be vastly more injurious to them and to dairy-
men than to any other class of our people. Last year
we imported dutiable horses to the number of 52,454,
of the average value of $42.81 ; cattle, 62,880, of the
average value of $9.68; hogs, 2,396, of the average
value of $3.28; and sheep, 454,010, of the avera^^e
value of $2.98. These animals were brought here
mainly, if not entirely, by the farmers themselves, or on
their account, to replenish their stock of work beasts,
milch cows, and sheep herds. This is evident, we

OF H£NBY OLAJ AND SINOfi. 186

thinky from the low prices of the animals and the
localities from which they were imported. For in-
stance, nearly all the horses imported came from Mex-
ico and from Qaebec, Ontario, Manitoba, and the
Northwest Territory, and the average valne of the
29,590 brought from Mexico was $8.80, while the aver-
age value of the 17,470 brought from the Dominion was
only a little over $100. These were not expensive ani-
mals imported for racing purposes, or for use in
pleasure carriages, but ordinary stock such as is used
upon our farms ; and it is evident that the importations
from Mexico were ponies for use on the sheep and cat-
tle ranches of the West The duty on these Mexican
horses last year amounted to $52,869, but if this bill
passes, and the same number is imported next year, the
duty will amount to $887,700, or nearly three and a
half times their value. The farmer or dairyman who
hereafter imports common cattle for his own use will
be required to pay a duty of over 100 per cent., ac-
cording to the average value of the importations of last
year, and he can not import an ordinary animal of any
kind for breeding purposes free of duty, as fine stock
may be imported, because such an animal is not pure
bred, and is therefore not registered abroad. How the
farmers are to be helped by the increased duties on live
auimals we are whoUy unable to see, and, in our opin-
ion, if this bill passes, they will be the first to demand
a restoration of the old rates, or that these importations
Daay be free.

^' The bill proposes to admit, free of duty, all sugar
up to and including No. 16 Dutch standard in color,
*ttd pay to the sugar producers in this country a bounty

186 THE TABIFP IN THE DAYS

of two cents per pound each year until July 1^ 1905, on
their product. Last year these grades of sugar which
are now made free, yielded to the Government $54,-
894,181, all of which is now to be surrendered, and the
sugar industry is to become an annual charge upon all
the people who are engaged in other occupations, some
of which are far more important and all of which are
fully as meritorious as this one. In 1888, which is the
last year for which we have complete returns, the sugar
product in this country was 375,855,877 pounds, so
that even should there be no increased production
under the bounty system the sum which the people are
to be compelled to donate each year for the support of
this favorite industry will be $7,520,000, or $118,000,-
000 during the fifteen years. But the very object of
the bounty is to encourage the production of this ar-
ticle, and its advocates claim that in a few years it will
result in a domestic supply equal to the whole demand
for home consumption, In addition to ilie home prod-
uct we imported and consumed during the last fiscal
year 2,700,421,302 pounds of sugar not above No. 16 in
color, making a total annual consumption, including
domestic and imported, of 8,076,277,079 pounds, and
therefore, if the system results as its advocates predict,
the annual payment out of the Treasury will be $61,-
528,426, even without any increase in the amount now
consumed. We protest against the gross favoritism
and injustice of such a policy, and we deny the moral
or constitutional right of the Government to tax the
people who grow com, wheat, cotton, rye, oats^ and
other agricultural products for the purpose of raising
money to be given to those who produce sugar or any
other article.

OF HENBY OLAT AND SINGE. 137

'^ It is impossible to state with eatire accuracy how
much the bill increases taxes upon, imported goods, for
the reason that there are many lai^e increases of taxa-
tion made by it which are not exhibited in the table
submitted by the Committee. This table shows that,
omitting the sugar schedule, there has been added to
the duties on the articles still remaining on the dutia-
ble list the sum of $40,055,162.88; but in addition to
this, after January 1, 1804, the duties on brown and
bleached linens, ducks, canvas, handkerchiefs, or other
woven fabrics, composed of flax, hemp, jute, or of
which flax, hemp, or jute, or either of them, shall be
the component material of cheap value, containing one
hundred or more threads to the square inch, counting
either the warp or filling, will be increased to the
amount of $1,574,954.57 more than is shown by the
tables; and after July 1, 1891, the duty on tin or teme
plate will be $8,871,878.67 greater than it was last year
upon the same importation, and the increase in the
tobacco schedule is^ as nearly as we can calculate it,
$6,551,855.41 more than the tables show. In our opin-
ion the increase in the tobacco schedule, resulting
mainly from the imposition of a duty of $2 per pound
on unstemmed leaf for cigar wrappers, will be $16,305,-
925 instead of $9,754,069.59, as shown by the tables,
and we are confident that an analysis of our importa-
tions of that article for a series of years past Mrill sus-
tain our position. Even the comparatively brief exami-
nation we have been able to make has disclosed other
increases not shown by the calculations contained in
the tables, amounting to the sum of over $8,000,000,
and there are many others which can not be accurately

138 THE TABIFF IN THE DATS

ascertained for the want of sufficient data as to prices
and quantities of importations of last year. Addii^
these amounts to the $409055,152.88, shows a total in-
crease of duties on articles still dutiable, outside of the
sugar schedule, of about $65,000,000, and we are satis-
fied it is more than that. We do not mean to assert
that the bill actually increases the customs revenue
$65,000,000 over what it is under existing law, but
that it proposes to impose upon the articles it leaves
upon the dutiable list, except sugar and molasses, that
sum in excess of the amount collected on the same
schedules last year. It places upon the free list articles
which yielded a revenue of $6,089,969 during the last
fiscal year, and it makes a reduction of $34,922,110.56
on sugar and molasses, and these two sums^ amounting
to $60,962,079.68, being deducted from the $65,000,000
leave a net increase of more than $4,000,000 in tariff
taxation under this bill. While the bill proposes to
transfer from the dutiable schedules to the free list artv
des which last year yielded a revenue of $6,089,969.07,
it proposes also to transfer from the free list to the
dutiable list certain articles, principally raw materials
used in manufactures, which, according to the importa-
tions during the last fiscal year, will yield a i-evenue of
nearly $8,500,000.

The bill came to a vote, on the question of passage,
on May 21st, its opponents making a fiual effort at
its defeat on the following motion : Mr. Carlisle moved
that ^^the pending bill be recommitted to the
Committee on Ways and Means, with instructions to
report the same back to the Hou^e at the earliest
possible day so amended by substitute or otherwise as

OF H£NBY CLAY AND SINOS. 139

to reduce the revenues of the Government by reducing
the burdens of taxation upon the people, instead of
reducing the revenues by imposing prohibitory rates
of taxation upon imported goods,'' — which was
disagreed to, yeas 140, all Democrats; nays 164,
all Republicans. The bill was then passed — ^yeas 164,
all Republicans ; nays 142, all Democrats but two, one
Republican and one Independent, while twenty-one
members, six Republicans and fifteen Democrats did
not vote. New England cast twenty-one votes for the
bill and three against it; the Middle States, yeas
forty-eight, nays twenty-eight ; the Western and North-
western States, yeas seventy-five, nays thirty-one; the
Southern and Southwestern, yeas eleven, nays seventy-
eight, and the Pacific, yeas nine, nays two.

The bill was reported by Mr. Morrill from the
Senate Finance Committee on June 18 th, and was
constantly considered, with various intervals, in Com-
mittee of the Whole, until September 8th. An interest-
ing colloquy occurred between Senators McPherson and
Sherman on July S5th, occasioned by the motion
of the former to recommit the bill to the Finance
Committee with instructions to prepare a bill which
would '^ reduce the average ad valorem rate of duty on
dutiable articles, based upon the importations of 1889,
80 as not to exceed the average ad valorem war tariff
rate of 1864,'' which he stated to be 89.69 per cent.
To this Mr. Sherman replied, ^' that while the rate of
duty on dutiable articles is a little less than 52 per
cent, under the pending bill, yet on the whole list of
articles taken together the avei'age rate of duty is only
about 27 per cent. Nearly fifty per cent, or half our

140 THE TARIFF IN THE DATS

importations under the proposed act, are entirely free
of duty, while under the act of 1864 only fifteen
to eighteen per cent, of the articles were free
of duty. The value of the goods that have heretofore
paid duty that are made free by this bill is $108,919,-
907 ; which added to the value of those free now makes
the grand aggregate of $365,494,573 as the value of all
of the articles that will be admitted free of duty under
the new law. This is much the largest free list ever
known in the history of the country, and almost equals
the value of the articles on which duties will be levied
by this bill, for while $865,494,537 of imported goods
are admitted free of duty, according to the figures of
last year, $390,437,117 are subjec*^ to duty.''

^'Now, the striking difference between the tariff
policy of 1864 and 1890," said Mr. Sherman, "is this :
In 1864 we were involved in war; we levied tariff
duties on almost every article of necessity, as well as
those articles that we manufacture in this country, and
therefore we levied duties not only on sugar, but on
tea, coffee, and almost everything else, and when at
that time the duties amounted to 46 per cent, on the
average, they were upon all articles imported practi-
cally. The free list was then only 10, or 12, or 15 per
cent, but now on account of the change of con-
ditions, from the fact that we wish to admit duty free
all articles that we can not produce in this country, we
admit substantially one-half of all imported goods
into this country free of duty, and we propose an
average duty of 52 per cent upon those articles that
we think we ought to make and can make in this
country, and for which we seek by these duties not

OF HENBT CLAT AND SINGE. Ul

only to get sufficient revenue to carry on the Govern-
menty but also to protect and foster and build up
American industry at the same time/'

The motion to recommit was lost — ^yeas nineteen, all
Democrats ; nays twenty-nine, all Republicans.

On September 8th, what was known as ^ the Reci-
procity Amendment/' by Mr. Aldrich, of Rhode Island,
was agreed to— yeas 87, all Republicans ; nays 28, all
Democrats but two. This policy had been recom-
mended by the International American Conference then
in session in this country, and was in keeping with the
long cherished policy of Mr. Blaine and the recommen-
dations of President Harrison in his special message to
Congress of June 19, 1890, in which he said:

^' It has been so often and so persistently stated that
our tariff laws offer an insurmountable barrier to a
large exchange of products with the Latin-American
nations that I deem it proper to call especial attention
to the fact that more than 87 per cent, of the products
of these nations sent to our ports are now admitted
free. If sugar is placed upon the free list, practically
every important article exported from those states will
be given untaxed access to our markets, except wool
The real difficulty in the way of negotiating profitable
reciprocity treaties is that we have given freely so much
that would have had value in the mutual concessions
which such treaties imply. I cannot doubt, however,
that the present advantages which the products of these
near and friendly states enjoy in our markets — though
they are not by law exclusive — will, with other consid-
erations, favorably dispose them to adopt such meas-
ures, by treaty, or otherwise, as will tend to equalize
and greatly enlarge our mutual exchanges."

142 THE TABIFF IN THE DATS

The Aldrich amendment was also agreed to in open
Senate — ^yeas 88, nays 29 ; and the bUl was passed, as
amended, on September 11th — ^yeas 40, all Republicans,
nays, 29, all Democrats. On September 15th the
House declined to agree to the Senate amendments and
a Committee of Conference was appointed — ^Messrs.
Aldrich, Sherman, Allison, Hiscock, Vorhees, Vance,
and Carlisle, for the Senate, and Messrs. McKinley,
Burrows, Bayne, Dingley, McMillan, Flower, and
Turner, of Georgia, for the House. The bill as it
passed the House contained nearly 4,000 items and was
amended by the Senate in 445 particulars^ more than a
hundred of which were purely verbal, and most of the
others so slight and unimportant that an agreement
was quickly reached. The changes by the Senate in
the metal schedule were important, and for the most
part acceded to by the House conferees, while in
woolens^ silks, flax, wood, and paper the Senate con-
ferees conceded the demands of the House. Sugar
evoked the most serious contention, and in this sched-
ule a compromise was effected ; sugar up to No. 16
Dutch standard was made free, and that above this
grade dutiable at a half cent per pound, with an addi-
tional rate of one-tenth of a cent upon all sugars coming
from countries where an export bounty is paid to the
domestic producers. Binding twine, after much dispu-
tation, was finally made dutiable at seven-tenths of a
cent a pound, and sulphuric acid, for agricultural pur-
poses, was made free. The Aldrich reciprocity amend-
ment was accepted by the House conferees ; while the
internal revenue sections were in the main accepted by
the Senate Conmuttee as the House had passed them.

OF HENBT CLAY AND SINGE. 143

The bill, bb finally agreed upon, was protective in
every paragraph, and American in every line and word.
It recognized and fully enforced the economic principle
of protection, which the Republican party from its birth
had steadfastly advocated, and that had always secured
to the country the greatest prosperity.

The Democratic members of the Conference Com-
mittee declined to unite in the report, but it was
nevertheless accepted by both branches of Congress.
The House concurred in it on September 27th — ^yeas
152, all Republicans ; nays 81, all Democrats but two.
Thirty-eight members were paired and fifty-five Demo-
crats did not vote. In the Senate the report was
adopted on September 80th — ^yeas 88, all Republicans ;
nays 27, all Democrats, except three ; and twenty-two
Senators were paired and did not vote. The law was
approved by President Harrison on the following day,
and, except where otherwise especially provided, went
into effect on October 6, 1890.

But its passage was hardly effected before the general
election occurred, and at this the Republicans were
badly defeated. The House of Representatives of the
Fifty-second Congress, elected in 1890, was overwhelm-
ingly Democratic, that party electing 285 of the 882
members.

President Harrison gave the tariff due and careful
consideration in his second annual message at the begin-
ning of the second session of the Fifty-first Congress,
December 1, 1890. In the course of his suggestions he
said:

^ The general trade and industrial conditions through-
out the country during the year have shown a marked

144 THE TABIFF IN THE DATS

improvement For many years prior to 1888 the mer-
chandise balances of foreign trade have been largely in
oar favor, but daring that year and the year following
they turned against us. It is very gratifying to know
that the last fiscal year again shows a balance in our
favor of over $68,000,000* There were three hundred
less failures reported in October, 1890, than in the
same month of the preceding year, with liabilities dimin-
ished by about $5,000,000. The value of our exports
of domestic merchandise during the last year was over
$116,000,000 greater than the preceding year, and was
only exceeded once in our history. About $100,000,000
of this excess was in agricultural products. The pro-
duction of pig iron — always a good gauge of general
prosperity— is shown by a recent census bulletin to have
been 158 per cent greater in 1890 than in 1880, and the
production of steel 290 per cent greater. Mining in
coal has had no limitation except that resulting from
deficient transportation. The general testimony is that
labor is everywhere fully employed, and the reports for
the last year show a smaller number of employes
affected by strikes and lockouts than in any year since
1884. The depression in the prices of agricultural
products has been greatly relieved, and a buoyant and
hopeful time was beginning to be felt by all our people.
'^The general tariff act has only partially gone into
operation, some of its important provisions being limited
to take effect at dates yet in the future. The general
provisions of the law have been in force less than sixty
days. Its permanent effect upon trade and prices still
largely stands in conjecture. It is curious to know that
the advance in the prices of articles wholly unaffected

OF HBHBT GUkT AHD 801011 146

by the tariff act waa by many hastily ascribed to that
act There is neither wisdom nor justice in the sogges-
tion that the subject of tariff revision shall be again,
opened before this law has had a fair triaL It is quite
true that every tariff schedule is subject to objections.
No bill was ever framed, I sii^>ose, that in all of its
rates and classifications had the full approval even of a
party caucus. Such legislation is always and neces-
sarily the product of compromise as to details, and the
present law is no exception. But in its general scope
and effect I think it will justify the support of those
who believe that American legislation should conserve
and defend American trade and the wages of American
workmen.

'^ The criticisms of the bill that have come to us from
foreign sources may well be rejected for repugnancy.
If these critics really believe that the adoption by us of
a free trade policy, or of tariff rates having reference
solely to revenue, would diminish the participation of
their own countries in the commerce of the world, their
advocacy and promotion by speech and other forms of
organized effort of this movement among our people is a
rare exhibition of unselfishness in trade. And on the
other hand, if they sincerely believe that the adoption
of a protective-tariff policy by this country inures to
their profit and our hurt, it is noticeably strange that
they should lead the outcry against the authors of a
policy so helpful to their countrymen, and crown with
their favor those who would snatch from them a sub
stantial share of a trade with other lands already in-
adequate to their necessities. There is no disposition
among any of our people to promote prohibitory or

lie l-HE TABIFF IN THE DAYS

retalktbiy l^iBlation. Our policies are adopted not to
tlie hurt of others, but to secure for ourselves those
advantages that fairly grow out of our favored position
as a nation. Our form of government, with its incident
of universal suffrage, makes it imperative that we shall
save our working people from the agitations and dis-
tresses which scant work and wages that have no
margin for comfort always beget But after all this is
done it will be found that our markets are open to
friendly commercial exchanges of enormous value to
the other great powers. From the time of my induc-
tion into office the duty of using every power and
influence given by law to the Executive Department
for the development of larger markets for our products^
especially our farm products, has been kept constantly
in mind, and no effort has been or will be spared to
promote that end. We are under no disadvantage in
.any foreign market, except that we pay our workmen
and workwomen better wages than are paid elsewhere
— ^better abstractly, better relatively to the cost of the
necessaries of life. I do not doubt that a very largely
increased foreign trade is accessible to us without
bartering for it either our home market for such pro-
ducts of the farm and shop as our own people can
supply, or the wages of our working people."

Several labor bills were considered by the Fifty-first
Congress. On August 29, 1890, Hon. W. J. Gonnell,
of Nebraska, reported a bill to the effect that eight
hours should constitute a day's work for all employes
of the Government, reference being especially had to
the District of Columbia, and providing severe penal-
ties for all violations of the law. The House rejected

OF HENBY CLAY AND SINGE. 147

a motion (by Hon. William J. Mutchler, Dem., of
Pennsylvania) to strike out the section relating to
penalties by the vote yeas 38, nays 107 and passed
the bill without a division. It was favorably reported
by the Committee on Labor in the Senate, but failed
because a vote upon it was not reached.

On August 80th, Hon. William H. Wade, of Mis-
souri, reported an important bill providing for the
adjustment of the accounts of laborers, workmen and
mechanics arising under the eight-hour law. An
amendment by the Hon. Mark S. Brewer, of Michigan,
was agreed to — yeas 57, nays 63 — and the bill was
passed by the House without a division.

In the Senate, on September 27th, the proviso by Mr.
Brewer was stricken from the bill by the vote, yeas 87,
nays 12, but the bill was not further considered at the
first session. On February 7, 1891, however, it was
again taken up and several amendments agreed to
when, on motion of Mr. Wolcott, of Colorado, it was
reconunitted to the Committee on Labor. On February
28th, Mr. Blair, of New Hampshire, reported a substi-
tute for the House bill, but in the hurry and rush of
the close of the session no vote was had upon it.

On August 30, 1890, Mr. Wade reported a bill from
the Committee on Labor '^ to prohibit the importation
and migration of foreigners and aliens under contract or
agreement to perform labor ^^ in this country. There
was but little opposition to the measure and after the
rejection of an amendment (offered by Hon. John Dal-
zell, of Pennsylvania) to the fifth section providing for
the importation of skilled laborors in certain cases on the
approval of the Secretary of the Treasury and Attorney

148 THE TARIFF IN THE DAYS

General, it waa passed by the House without a division.
The bill was considered by the Senate on September
27th, and various amendments were agreed to, but no
decisive action was ever taken upon it

On the same day, August 80th, Mr. Wade reported
a second bill, from the Committee on Labor, to prevent
the employment of convicts on Government work, and
it, too, was passed by the House without amendment or
division. It was reported favorably in the Senate, but
a vote was not taken upon it.

A third bill was reported to the House the same day
by Mr. Wade, which made it unlawful for any agent ot
officer of the Government to purchase, or permit to be
purchased for the Government, any supplies of any des-
cription whatever, which were in whole or in part the
product of convict labor. It was passed by the House
without change or dissent but met with the same fate
as its predecessors in the Senate.

We have seen that in 1862 Congress levied a direct
tax upon the realty of the country, apportioned among
the several States according to popidation. The States
themselves were authorized to assume the collection
and payment of this ta2c, less fifteen per cent for the
expense and trouble of collecting it. Nearly all the
Northern States assumed the tax and paid it over to the
Treasury of the United States, but in all of the eleven
seceding States no assumption of it was made. The
collectors, however, proceeded as far as practicable to
levy and enforce the tax, and in this way they gathered
in about $2,250,000 in round numbers, from individual
citizens of the seceding States. The balance assessed
against these States, amounting to about $2,600,000,

OF HENBY CLAY AND BINGE. U9

was never recovered, and np to this time (1891) still
stood against them. In the Fiftieth Congress a bill
was passed restoring to all the States which had paid this
tax the amoont they had paid the Government and re-
lieving the States from which the tax was still due the
amount charged against them. It was vetoed by Presi-
dent Cleveland, and the Senate, on March 2, 1889,
passed the bill over his veto. But the bill was not
reached in the House and therefore failed. In the
Fifty-first Congress, the Senate again passed a bill at
the first session, but the House did not reach it until
the next session. On February 24, 1891, however, the
House agreed to an amendment by Hon. Lucian B.
Caswell, of Wisconsin, and passed the bill by a vote of
172 to 101. The Senate agreed to the amendment by
the House, and President Harrison approved the law on
March 2d. Under its provisions $15,227,682 were dis-
tributed among the several States and Territories, of
which stun three States received over five million dol-
lars; New York $2,213,880, Pennsylvania $1,684,711,
and Ohio $1,882,025.

One of the most important acts passed at the second
session of the Fifty-first Congress — affecting as it did
every laborer in the country — ^was familiarly known as
^ the Owen Immigration Law," from its author, Hon.
William D. Owen, of Indiana. It was an amendment to
the various acts relating to immigration, and to the
importation of aliens under contract or agreement to
perform labor. It provided a new method for the
inspection of emigrant ships, agencies, offices, and
stations, and fixed more definitely the responsibility of
steamship or transportation companies, and the owners

ISO THE TARIFF IK THE DAYS

of vessels^ or their agents, witli heavier penalties for
the violation of the law. Mr. Owen reported the bill
from the Select Committee to which it had been
referred at the first session, on February 24, 1891, and
Hon. William C. Oates, of Alabama, offered a sub*
stitute amending existing statutes but making leas
radical changes. This substitute was rejected — ^yeas
41, Republicans 24, Democrats 17; nays 209, Be*
publicans 114, Democrats 95; while 89 Republicans
and 45 Democrats were absent or did not vote. The
bill was then passed without division and went to the
Senate. Here it was passed unanimously on February
27.th, and became a law by the approval of President
Harrison on March Srd.

What was known as " the Hawaiian Treaty Bill,''
was reported from the Ways and Means Committee on
February 28, 1891, and passed by the House without
division. It was considered in the Senate on March
2nd and passed without opposition and on the day
following was approved by President Harrison. A
treaty of reciprocity had been entered into between the
United States and Hawaii on January IS, 1875, and ex-
tended by the convention proclaimed November 9,
1887, and this law simply provided that nothing in the
act of October 6, 1890, should be held to repeal .or
impair the provisions of the foregoing agreement.

The House in the Fifty-second Congress organized
by electing Hon. Charles F. Crisp, of Georgia, Speaker,
and Hon. William M. Springer, of Dlinois, was
appointed by him Chairman of the Ways and Means
Committee. The Senate remained Bepublican by forty-
seven of the eighty-eight members. Hon. Charles F.

OF HENBT CLAY AKD SINGE. 161

Manderson, of Nebraska, was elected President pro
tem.y and Mr. Morrill continued as Chairman of the
Finance Committee.

In his third annual message at the beginning of the
first session of the Fifty-second Congress, December 9,
1891, President Harrison wrote at some length of the
operations of the new tariff law. He was gratified at
the prospect, and observed, with force and clearness:

"Rarely, if ever before in the history of the country,
has there been a time when the proceeds of one day^s
labor or the product of one farmed acre would purchase
so large an amount of those things that enter into the
living of the masses of the people. I believe that a full
test will develop the fact that the tariff act of the Fifty-
first Congress is very favorable in its average effect
upon the prices of articles entering into common use.
During the twelve months from October 1, 1890, to
September 80, 1891, the total value of our foreign
commerce (imports and exports combined) was $1,747,-
806,406, which was the largest of any year in the his-
tory of the United States. The largest in any previous
year was in 1890, when our commerce amounted to
$1,647,189,098, and the last year exceeds this enormous
aggregate by over one hundred millions. It is interest-
ing, and to some will be surprising, to know that during
the year ending September SO, 1891, our imports of
merchandise amounted to $824,715,270, which was an
increase of more than eleven million dollars over the
value of the imports of the corresponding months of the
preceding year, when the imports of merchandise were
unusually large in anticipation of the tariff legislation
then pending. The average annual value of the imports

163 THE TAKIPF IN THE DAYS

of merehandise for the ten years from 1881 to 1890 was
$692,186,522, and during the year ending September 30,
1891, this annual average was exceeded by |132,628,469.
The value of free imports during the twelve months
ending September 80, 1891, was $118,092,887 more
than the value of free imports during the corresponding
twelve months of the preceding year, and there was
during the same period a decrease of $106,846,608 in
the value of imports of dutiable merchandise. The per-
centage of merchandise admitted free of duty during the
year to which I have referred, the first under the new
tariff, was 48.18, while during the preceding twelve
months, under the old tariff, the percentage was 34.27,
an increase of 13.91 per cent If we take the six months
ending September 80th last, which covers the time
during which sugars have been admitted free of duty,
the per cent, of value of merchandise imported free of
duty is found to be 55.37, which is a larger percentage
of free imports than during any prior fiscal year in the
history of the Government. If we turn to exports of
merchandise, the statistics are full of gratification. The
value of such exports of merchandise for the twelve
months ending September 30, 1891, was $923,091,136,
while for the corresponding previous twelve months it
was $860,177,115, an increase of $62,914,021, which is
nearly three times the average annual increase of ex-
ports of merchandise for the preceding twenty years;
this exceeds in amount and value the exports of mer-
chandise during any year in the history of the Govern-
ment. The increase in the value of exports of agri-
cultural products during the year referred to over the
corresponding twelve months of the prior year was

OF HENBY CLAY AND SINGE. 168

$45,846^197, while the increase in the valae of expoi*ts
of manufactured products was $16,888,240. There is
certainly nothing in the condition of trade, foreign or
domestic, there is certainly nothing in the condition of
our people of any class, to suggest that the existing
tariff and revenue legislation bears oppressively upon
the people or retards the commercial development of
the Nation. It may be argued that our condition Would
be better if tariff legislation were on a free-trade basis ;
but it can not be denied that all the conditions of
prosperity and of general contentment are present in a
larger degree than ever before in our history, and that,
too, just when it was prophesied they would be in the
worst state. Agitation for radical changes in tariff and
financial legislation can not help, but may seriously
impede, business, to the prosperity of which some degree
of stability in legislation is essential I think there are
conclusive evidences that the new tariff has created
several great industries which will, within a few years,
give employment to several hundred thousand American
working men and women. In view of the somewhat
overcrowded condition of the labor market of the
United States every patriotic citizen should rejoice at
such a result The report of the Secretary of the
Treasury shows that the total receipts of the Grovem-
ment, from all sources, for the fiscal year ending June 80,
1891, were $458,644,233.08, while the expenditures for
the same period were $421 804,470.46, leaving a surplus
of $37,239,762,67.''

During the recess of Congress treaties of reciprocity
had been entered into between the United States and
the following countries, and were duly proclaimed by

154 . THE TARIFF IN THE DATS

President Harrison on the dates given: Brazil, Feb-
ruary 5y 1891 ; Spain, July 81, 1891 ; and San Domingo,
August 7, 1891. Other treaties are as follows: Sal-
vador, December 31, 1891 ; Germany, February 1, 1892,
Great Britain, February 1, 1892, applicable to British
Guiana, Trinidad and Tobago, Barbados, the Leeward
Islands, and the Windward Islands, except Grenada ;
Nicaragua, March 12, 1892 ; Honduras, April 80, 1892;
Guatemala, May 18, 1892; Austria-Hungary, May 26,
1892. A proclamation was also issued by President
Harrison, on March 15, 1892, suspending the free ad-
mission in the United States of the sugar, molasses,
coffee and tea produced in Hayti. The articles which
were benefited by these treaties were about 292 in num-
ber and consisted in part of agricultural implements, live
stock, clocks and watches, cotton yarns and goods^ meat
extracts, condensed milk, iron and steel manu&ctures,
tools, leather, resin, tar, paraffine, cheese, pianos, car-
riages, fiour, ojIa, barks and extracts, and brass and its
manufactures.

On February 9, 1892, the House passed a bill to
amend the internal revenue laws, as to violations,
penalties, and other particulars. Mr. Bynum^ of
Indiana, moved the previous question and the bill was
passed — ^yeas 173, nays 39. In the Senate it was re-
ferred to the Committee on Judiciary.

On April 4th, Hon. Thomas J. Geary, of Califor-
nia, secured the consideration in the House of his bill
to absolutely prohibit the coming of Chinese into the
United States. The rules were suspended and it was
passed — ^yeas 179, nays 43. In the Senate, a substitute
was reported by the Committee on Foreign Relations^

OF HENBT GLAT AND SINGE. 166

on April 25th, and accepted by a vote of 48 to 14.
The bill was then passed bat the Honse refused to con-
cur, and a Committee of Conference was appointed con-
sisting of Senators Dolph, Sherman, and Morgan, and
Bepresentatives Geary, Chipman, and Hitt They re-
ported an amended bill (Messrs. Sherman and Hitt not
signing the report) which was accepted and passed by
the Senate on May 8rd — ^yeas 30, nays 15, and by the
House on May 4th — ^yeas 186, nays 27 — and approved
by the President on May 5, 1892.

The House at this session passed a series of^tariff bills,
which were derisively styled by the press as ''pop gun
bills^" probably because it was well known in advance
that they would avail nothing, neither pass the Senate
nor be approved by the President On April 4th a bill
was reported "to place wool on the free list and reduce
the duties on woolen goods." It passed the House, on
April 7th, by a vote of 194 to 60 — ^two Democrat^ vot-
ing with the Republicans in the negative. The Senate
referred this bill to the Committee on Finance.

On April 9th, a bill " to admit free of duty bagging
for cotton, machinery for manufacturing bagging, cotton-
ties, and cotton-gins,'' was passed by the House by the
vote — ^yeas (Democrats) 167 ; nays (Republicans) 46.
In the Senate it was referred to the Committee on
Finance.

On May 2nd, Hon. William J. Bryan, of Nebraska,
moved to suspend the rules and pass his bill to place
binding twine on the free list. This was agreed to —
yeas 188, nays 47, two Republicans voting in the affir-
mative and three Democrats in the negative. The Senate
referred it to the Committee on Finance.

tR4 THE TABIFF IN THE DATS

Hon. Samuel Fowler, of New Jersey, on May 2nd,
moved to suspend the rules of the House and pass his
bill to encourage American shipping — ^that is, grant
registers as vessels of the United States to the steam-
ships "City of New York,'' "City of Paris,'' and such
other foreign-built steamships as were then or might
thereafter be engaged in the freight and passenger
business in any established line from a port in the
United State& The motion was agreed to and the bill
passed without division. In the Senate the bill was
favorably reported and passed on May 9th — ^yeas forty-
one, Republicans twenty-four, Democrats seventeen;
nays ten. Republicans four, Democrats six. It was ap-
proved by President Harrison, May 11, 1892. A similar
bill by Mr. Fowler to grant a register to the steamship
'^ China" was defeated by the House on July 20th.
It was laid on the table, by a vote of 107 to 84.

On July 1st, the House Committee on Labor
reported a bill " to enforce the eight-hour law," which
was passed under suspension — ^yeas 166, nays, all
Democrats, 31. In the Senate, it was passed on July
28th, without division, and was approved by the
President on July 30th.

On July 8th, Hon. Benjamin F. Shively, of Indiana,
moved to suspend the rules and pass a bill to reduce
the duty on tin and tin-plate to one cent per pound.
This was agreed to and the bill passed — ^yeas 207, nays
61, a strict party vote. No action was taken on the bill
in the Senate. ^

Hon. Justin R. Whiting, of Michigan, on July 8th,
moved to suspend the rules and pass his bill reducing
the duty on lead ores to one and a half or one and a

OF HENBT GLAT AND SINGE. 167

tbiid cents per pound, which was agreed to — ^yeas 196,
nays 63, including three Democrats. The Senate took
no action upon it

On the same day the same gentleman secured a
suspension and the passage of a bill to reduce the duty
on the wearing apparel of tourists from the United
States to Europe ; also on other personal effects. The
Senate, however, did not consider it.

On July 28th, pending consideration of the Senate
amendments to the Sundry Civil Bill, the House
adopted an amendment against the employment of
Pinkerton detectives in any Government service or by
any officer of the District of Columbia — ^yeas 159, nays
d4. In the Senate, this and other House amendments
were not concurred in, and the matter was referred to a
Committee of Conference — Senators Allison, Cullom,
and Gorman, and Representatives Holman, Sayres^ and
Bingham. On April 5th this Committee reported by
&vor of retaining the clause, and it was agreed to by
the House — ^yeas 169, nays 4 — ^and by the Senate with-
out a division.

The tenth Republican National Convention as-
sembled in Minneapolis, Minn., June 7, 1892. The
platform was unanimously adopted on June 10th, and
in its treatment of the tariff it declared:

"We reaffirm the American doctrine of protection.
We call attention to its growth abroad. We maintain
that the prosperous condition of our country is largely
due to the wise revenue legislation of the Republican
Congress. We believe that all articles which can not
be produced in the United States, except luxuries,
should be admitted free of duty, and that on all im-

158 THE TARIFF IK THE DATCT

ports coming into competition with the products of
American labor there should be levied duties equal to
the difference between wages abroad and at home.
We assert that the prices of manufactured articles of
general consumption have been reduced under the
operations of the tariff act of 1890. We denounce the
efforts of the Democratic majority of the House of
Representatives to destroy our tariff laws by piecemeal,
as manifested by their attacks upon wool, lead and lead
ores, the chief products of a number of States, and we
ask the people for their judgment thereon* We point
to' the success of the Republican policy of reciprocity,
under which our export ti*ade has vastly increased, and
new and enlarged markets have been opened for the
products of our farms and workshops. We remind the
people of the bitter opposition of the Democratic party
to this practical business measure, and claim that, ex-
ecuted by a Republican Administration, our present
laws will eventually give us control of the trade of the
world. We reaffirm our opposition, declared in the
Republican platform of 1888, to all combinations of
capital organized in trusts, or otherwise, to control
arbitrarily the condition of trade among our citizens.
We heartily indorse the action already taken upon this
subject, and ask for such further legislation as may be
required to remedy any defects in existing laws and to
render their enforcement more complete and effective.^

Mr. Harrison was renominated on the first ballot for
President, and Hon. Whitelaw Reid, of New York, on
the first ballot for Vice-President.

The Democratic National Convention met in Chicago
on June 21st. The platform as reported the next day

OF HENBT CLAT AKD 8IN0K 159

contained the following declaration on the subject of
^ revenue tariffs,'^ as its second plank, namely :

^' We reiterate the oft-repeated doctrines of the Dem-
ocratic party that the necessities of the (royemment is
the only justification for taxation, and whenever a tax
is unnecessary it is unjustifiable ; that when custom-
house taxation is levied upon articles of any kind pro-
duced in this country, the difference between the cost
of labor here and labor abroad, when such a difference
exists, fully measures any possible benefits to labor, and
thA enormous additional impositions of the existing tariff
fall with crushing force upon our farmers and working-
men, and for the mere advantage of the few whom it
enriches, exact from labor a grossly unjust share of the
expenses of the Government, and we demand such a
revision of the tariff laws as will remove their iniquitous
inequalities, lighten their oppressions, and put them on
a constitutional and equitable basis. But in making
reduction in taxes it is not proposed to injure any domes^
tic industries, but rather to promote their healthy
growth. From the foundation of this Government taxes
collected at the custom-house have been the chief source
of Federal revenue. Such they must continue to be.
Moreover, many industries have come to rely upon legis-
lation for successful continuance, so that any change of
law must be at every step regardful of the labor and
capital thus involved. The process of reform must be
subject in its execution to the plain dictates of justice.'^

Although this breathed the spirit of the Democratic
tariff resolutions of 1884, on which Mr. Cleveland had
been elected to the Presidency, it encountered most
determined opposition. Hon. Lawrence T. Neal, of

160 THE TABIFF IK THE DAYS

Ohio, oa behalf of himself and other members of the
Ciommittee on Resolutions, moved that this paragraph
be stricken from the platform, and the following sub-
stitute be adopted :

'^ We denounce Republican protection as a fraud; a
robbery of the great majority of the American people
for the benefit of the few. We declare it to be a fun-
damental principle of the Democratic party that the
Federal Government has no constitutional power to im-
pose and collect tariff duties, except for the purpose
of revenue only, and we demand that the collection of
such taxes shall be limited to the necessities of the Gov-
ernment when honestly and economically administered.
We denounce the McKinley tariff law, enacted by the
Fifty-first Congress, as the culminating atrocity of class
l^slation ; we indorse the efforts made by the Dem-
ocrats of the present Congress to modify its most op-
pressive feature in the direction of free raw* materials
and cheaper manufactured goods that enter into general
consumption, and we promise its repeal as one of the
beneficent results that will follow the action of the
people in entrusting power to the Democratic party.
Since the McKinley tariff went into operation there have
been ten reductions of the wages of the laboring man to
one increase. We deny that there has been any increase
of prosperity to the country since the tariff went into
operation, and we point to the dullness and distress, the
wage reductions and strikes in the iron trade, as the best
possible evidence that no such prosperity has resulted
from the McKinley act We call the attention of
thoughtful Americans to the fact that after thirty years
of restrictive taxes against the importation of foreign

OF HENBT CLAY AND 8IHGEL 161

wealthy in exchange for our agricultural surplus, the
homes and farms of the country have become bardened
with a real estate mortgage debt of over $2,500,000,000,
exclusive of all other forms of indebtedness ; that in one
of the chief agricultural States of the West there ap-
pears a real estate mortgage debt averaging $165 per
capita of the total population, and that similar condi-
tions and tendencies are shown to exist in other agri-
cultural exporting State& We denounce a policy which
fosters no industry so much as it does that of the sheiiS.'*

After a brief but spirited debate the motion by Mr.
D^eal was agreed to— yeas 564, nays 342. Eighteen
States (Colorado, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Mich-
igan, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New York,
North Dakota, Ohio, South Carolina, Texas, Washing-
ton, West Virginia, and Wyoming) voted unanimously
in &vor of the substitute, and thirteen (Arkansas, Cali-
iomia, Connecticut, Delaware, Kansas, Maine, Minnesota,
New Hampshire, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Rhode
Island, Vermont, and Wisconsin) solidly against it.
Fifteen del^ates in lUinois opposing the substitute,
five in Minnesota favoring it, and fifteen in Pennsylvania
opposing ity were deprived of the expression of their
individual views, since, under the unit rule, their votes
were counted with the majority of their respective del-
egations. The following additional planks on *' reci-
procity ^ and " trusts " were agreed to, and the platform
as amended was unanimously adopted :

^ Trade interchange on the basis of reciprocal advant-
ages to the countries participating is a time-honored
doctrine of the Democratic faith, but we denounce the
aham reciprocity which juggles with the people's desiie

162 THE TABIFF IN THE DATS

for enlarged foreign markets and freer exchanges by
pretending to establisli closer trade relations for a
country whose articles of export are almost exclusively
agricultural products with other countries that are also
agricultural, while erecting a custom-house barrier of
prohibitive tariff taxes against the rich and the coun-
tries of the world that stand ready to to take our entire
surplus of products and to exchange therefor conunodi-
ties which are necessaries and comforts of life among
our people.

^ We recognize in the trusts and combinations which
are designed to enable capital to secure more than its
just share of the joint product of capital and labor, a
natural consequence of the prohibitive taxes which
prevent the free competition which is the life of honest
trade; but we believe their worst evils can be abated
by law, and we demand the rigid enforcement of the
laws made to prevent and control them, together with
such further legislation in restraint of their abuses as
experience may show to be necessary."

The Convention completed its labors by nominating
Grover Cleveland, of New York, for President, for a
third time in succession, despite the united opposition of
the delegation from his own State, by 617 votes out of
a total of 909. A ballot was taken for Vice-President
resulting : Adlai E. Stevenson, of Illinois, 402 votes,
Isaac P. Gray, of Indiana, 843, and 164 for some five or
six other favorites — ^and upon its conclusion Mr. Ste-
venson was nominated by acclamation.

President Harrison devoted about half of his masterly
letter of acceptance — dated at Washington, September
Srd — to an able and compreheDsive discussion of the

OF HENBT GLAT AND SINGE. 163

tariff law of 1890. Speaking of the substitute of the
minority of the Committee on Resolutions adopted by
the Democracy at Chicago, he said :

'^ The substitute declares that protective duties are un*
constitutional — ^high protection, low protection — all
unconstitutional A Democratic Congress holding this
view can not enact, nor a Democratic President ap
prove, any tariff schedule the purpose or effect of which
is to limit importations, or to give any advantage to an
American workman or producer. A bounty might, I
judge, be given to the importer under this view of the
constitution, in order to increase importations, and so
revenue for ''revenue only" is the limitation. Reci-
procity, of course, falls under this denunciation, for its
object and effect are not revenue but the promotion of
commercial exchanges, the profits of which go wholly to
our producers. This destructive un-American doctrine
was not held or taught by the historic Democratic
statesmen, whose fame as patriots has reached this gen-
eration — certainly not by Jefferson or Jackson. This
mad crusade against American shops, the bitter epithets
applied to American manufacturers, the persistent dis-
belief of every report of the opening of a tin-plate mill,
or of an increase in our foreign trade by reciprocity, are
as surprising as they are discreditable. There is not a
thoughtful business man in the country who does not
know that the enactment into law of the declaration of
the Chicago convention upon the subject of the tariff
would at once plunge the country into a business con-
vulsion such as it has never seen ; and there is not a
thoughtful workingman who does not know that it
would at once enormously affect the amount of work to

164 THE TABIFF IK THE DAYS

be done in this country, by the increase of importations
that would follow, and necessitate a reduction of his
wages to the European standard. If any one suggests
that this radical policy will not be executed if the
Democratic party attains power, what shall be thought
of a party that is capable of thus trifling with great in-
terests ? The threat of such legislation would be only
less hurtful than the fact. A distinguished Democrat
rightly described this movement as a challenge to the
protected industries to a fight of extermination, and an-
other such rightly expressed the logic of the situation
when he interpreted the Chicago platform to be an invi-
tation to all Democrats holding then the most moderate
protection views to go into the Bepublican party.

''And now a few words in regard to the existing
tariff law. We are fortunately able to judge of its
influence upon production and prices by the market re-
ports. The day of the prophet of calamity has been
succeeded by that of the trade reporter. An examina-
tion into the effects of the law upon the prices of pro-
tected products, and of the cost of such articles as enter
into the living of people of small means^ has been made
by a Senate Committee, composed of leading Senators
of both parties, with the aid of the best statisticians, and
the report, signed by all the members of the Committee,
has been given to the public. No such wide and care-
ful inquiry has ever before been made. These facts
appear from the report :

"FiBST. — ^The cost of articles entering into the use of
those earning less than $1,000 per annum has decreased,
up to May, 1892, 8.4 per cent., while in farm products
there has been an increase in prices, owing, in part, to

OF HENBY CLAY AND SINGE. 166

an increased foreign demand and opening of new mar-
kets. In England, during the same period, the cost of
living increased 1.9 per cent. Tested by their power to
purchase articles of necessity, the earnings of our work-
ing people have never been as great as they are now.

•* Second. — ^There has been an average advance in the
rates of wages of .75 of 1 per cent.

"Thied. —There has been an advance in the price of
all farm products of 18.67 per cent, and of all cereals
88.59 per cent.

''The act of 1890 gives to the miners protection
against foreign silver-bearing lead ores, the free intro-
duction of which threatened the great mining industries
of the Rocky Mountain States, and to the wool-growers
protection for their fleeces and flocks, which has saved
them from a further and disastrous decline. The House
of Representatives, at its last session, passed bills plac-
ing these ores and wool upon the free list. The people
of the West well know how destructive to their pros-
perity these measures will be. The tariff law has ^ven
employment to many thousands of American men and
women, and will each year give employment to increas-
ing thousands. Its repeal would throw thousands out
of employment, and give work to others only at reduced
wages. The appeals of the freetraders to the working-
man are largely addressed to his prejudices or to his
passions, and not infrequently are pronouncedly com-
munistic. The new Democratic leadership rages at the
employer, and seeks to communicate this rage to the
employe. I r^ret that all employers of labor are not
just and considerate, and that capital sometimes takes
too large a share of the profits, but I do not see that

166 THE TABIFF IK THE DAT8

these evils will be ameliorated by a tariff policy
the first necessary effect of which is a severe wage
cut, and the second a large diminution of the aggre-
gate amount of work to be done in this country.
If the injustice of the employer tempts the work-
man to strike back, he should be very sure that
his blow does not fall upon his own head or upon
his wife and children. The workmen in our great
cities are, as a body, remarkably intelligent, and
are lovers of home and country. They may be roused
by injustice, or what seems to them to be such, or be
led for the moment by others into acts of passion, but
they will settle the tariff contest in the calm light of
their November firesides, and with sole reference to the
prosperity of the country of which they are citizens^
and of the homes they have founded for their wives
and children. No intelligent advocate of a protective
tariff claims that it is able of itself to maintain a uni-
form rate of wages without regard to fluctuation in the
supply of, and demand for, the products of labor. But
it is confidently claimed that protective duties strongly
tend to hold up wages, and are the only barrier against
reduction to the European scale. The Southern States
have had a liberal participation in the benefits of the
tariff law, and, though their representatives have gen-
erally opposed the protective policy, I rejoice that their
sugar, rice, coal, ores, iron, fruits, cotton cloths and
other products have not been left to the fate which the
votes of their representatives would have brought upon
them. In the construction of the Nicaragua Canal, in
the new trade with South and Central America, in the
establishment of American steamship lines, these States

OF HENBY CLAT AND SINGE. 167

have also special interests, and all these interests will
not always consent to be without representation at
Washington.

" Shrewdly, but not quite fairly, our adversaries speak
only of the increased duties imposed on linen, pearl
buttons, and other articles by the McKinley bill, and
omit altogether any reference to the great and bene-
ficial enlargement of the free list During the last fiscal
year $466,000,772 worth of merchandise, or 59.86 per
cent, of our total imports came in free (the largest per-
centage in our history), while in 1889 the percentage
of importations was only 84.42 per cent. The placing of
sugar on the free list has saved the consumer in duties in
thirteen months, after paying the bounties provided for,
$87,000,000. This relief has been substantially felt in
every household, upon every Saturday's purchase of the
workingman. One of the favorite arguments against a
protective tariff is that it shuts us out from a participa-
tion in what is called with swelling emphasis ^the
markets of the world.' If this view is not a false one,
how doth it happen that our commercial competitors
are not able to bear with more serenity our supposed
surrender to them of the ^markets of the world?'
And how does it happen that the partial loss of our
market closes foreign tin plate mills and plush factories
that still have all other markets? Our natural ad-
vantages, our protective tariff, and the reciprocity
policy, make it possible for us to have a large partici-
pation in the ^ markets of the world,' without opening
our own to a competition that would destroy the com-
fort and independence of our peopla"

Mr. Reid responded in a letter of great strength ^nd

X68 THE TARIFF IK THS DATS

force, dated at Ophir Farm, N. Y., October IStk In
speaking of the magnificent results which had accraed
to the American people nnder a protective tariff he
observed :

'' The expediency of a protective tariff has been vin-
dicated by the experience of the past thirty years — ^the
most wonderful period of financial success over un-
heard-of difficulties in the record of modem civilization.
Under it^ and by its aid^ the Republican management
of our finances has resulted in the largest payment of a
National debt in the shortest time known to history,
and in the simultaneous development of the industries of
the country and the prosperity of the people on a scale
without a parallel Eight years ago, in a masterly pub-
lic paper, James G. Blaine called attention to the revela-
tions of the United States census as to the net results
of the labor and savings of the American people imder
the system of a protective tariff. The Hme value' of
all the property in the United States^ excluding slaves,
was set down in the census of 1860 at fourteen thou-
sand millions of dollars — that being what there was to
show for the toil of 260 years. With the success of
the Bepublican party that year, the Republican pro-
tective policy which has since prevailed was introduced.
In the census of 1880, the true value of the property in
the United States was set down at forty-four thousand
millions of dollars — making an increase in those twenty
years of Republican protection of thirty thousand mil-
lions, or over double the entire growth in the previous'
260 years. We are now able to carry the comparison
ten years further, through the disclosures of another
decennial census. It appears that the property of the

OF HEHBY CLAY AND BIHOE. 108

United States has been still further increased in the last
ten years by fourteen thousand millions of dollars —
making a total increase in the thirty years of Repub-
lican rule and a Republican protective tariff of forty-
four thousand millions of dollars, against the fourteen
thousand millions earned in the prei^ious 250 years.''

Mr. Cleveland, writing from Gray Gables, Mass., Sep-
tember 26th, devoted a third of his letter to a disserta-
tion upon what he termed ^^ the exploded theories of
protection,'' and the advantages of ^' tariff reform as a
Ifational necessity." He said :

^^ Tariff legislation presents a familiar form of Federal
taxation. Such legislation results as surely in a tax
upon the daily life of our people as the tribute paid
directly into the hand of the tax-gatherer. We feel the
burden of these tariff taxes too palpably to be per^
suaded by any sophistry that they do not exist, or are
paid by foreigners. Such taxes, representing a diminu-
tion of the property rights of the people, are only justi-
fiable when laid and collected for the purpose of main-
taining our Government, and furnishing the means for
the accomplishment of its Intimate purposes and func-
tions. This is taxation under the o|)eration of a tariff
for revenue. It accords with the professions of Ameri-
can free institutions, and its justice and honesty answer
the test supplied by a correct appreciation of the prin-
ciples upon which these institutions rest. This theory
of tariff legislation manifestly enjoins strict economy in
public expenditures and their limitation to legitimate
public uses, inasmuch as it exhibits as absolute extor-
tion any exaction, by way of taxation, from the sub-
stance of the people, beyond the necessities of a careful
and proper administration of Government

170 THE TABIFF IN THE DATS

^^ Opposed to this theory, the dogma is now boldly
presented that tariff taxation is justifiable for the ex-
press purpose and intent of thereby promoting special
interests and enterprises. Such a proposition is so
clearly contrary to the spirit of our Constitution, and so
directly encourages the disturbance by selfishness and
greed of patriotic sentiment, that its statement would
rudely shock our people if they had not already been
insidiously allured from the safe landmarks of prin-
ciple. Never have honest desire for National growth,
patriotic devotion to country, and sincere regard for
those who toil, been so betrayed to the support of a per-
nicious doctrine. In its behalf the plea that our infant
industries should be fostered did service until discred-
ited by our stalwart growth ; then followed the exigen-
cies of a terrible war, which made our people heedless
of the opportunities for ulterior schemes afforded by
their willing and patriotic payment of unprecedented
tribute ; and now, after a long period of peace, when
Qur overburdened countrymen ask for relief and a
restoration to a fuller enjoyment of their incomes and
earnings, they are met by the claim that tariff taxation
for the sake of protection is an American system, the
continuance of vvliich is necessary in oi'der that high
wages may be paid to our workingmen and a home
market be provided for our farm products. These pre-
tenses should no longer deceive. The truth is that
such a system is directly antagonized by every senti-
ment of justness and fairness of which Americans are
pre-eminently proud. It is also true that while our
workingmen and farmers can, the least of all our peo-
ple, defend themselves against the harder home life

OF HEKBY CLAY ASD BINOE. 171

which such tariff taxation decrees, the workingman suf-
fering from the importation and employment of pauper
labor, instigated by his professed friends, and seeking
security for his interests in organized co-operation, still
waits for a division of the advantages secured to his em-
ployer under cover of a generous solicitude for his
virages, while the £&rmer is learning that the prices of
his products are fixed in foreign markets, where he
suffers from a competition invited and built up by the
system he is asked to support. The struggle for un-
earned advantage at the doors of the Government
tramples on the rights of those who patiently rely upon
assurances of American equality. Every governmental
concession to clamorous favorites invites corruption in
political affairs by encouraging the expenditure of
money to debauch suffrage in support of a policy
directly favorable to private and selfish gain. This in
the end must strangle patriotism and weaken popular
confidence in the rectitude of republican institutions.
Though the subject of tariff legislation involves a
question of markets, it also involves a question of
morals. We can not with impunity permit injustice to
taint the spirit of right and equity which is the life of
our Republic ; and we shall fail to reach our National
destiny if greed and selfishness lead the way.

*^ Recognizing these truths, the National Democracy
will seek to equalize to our people the blessings due
them from the Government they support, to promote
among our countrymen a closer community of interests
cemented by patriotism and National pride, and to point
out a fair field where prosperous and diversified Ameri-
iJan enterprise may grow and thrive in the wholesome

172 THE TAKIFF IN THE BAYS

atmosphere of American industry^ ingenuity, and in-
telligence. Tariff reform is still our purpose. Though
we oppose the theory that tariff laws may be passed
having for their object the granting of discriminating
and unfair governmental aid to private ventures, we
wage no exterminating war against any American
interests. We believe a readjustment can be accom-
plished, in accordance with the principles we pro-
fess, without disaster or demolition. We believe
that the advantages of freer raw material should be
accorded to our manufacturers, and we contemplate
a fair and careful distribution of necessary tariff
burdens rather than the precipitation of free trade.
We anticipate with calmness the misrepresentation
of our motives and purposes, instigated by a sel-
fishness which seeks to hold in unrelenting grasp its
unfair advantage under present tariff laws. We will
rely upon the intelligence of our fellow-countrymen to
reject the charge that a party comprising a majority of
our people is planning the destruction or injury of
American interests; and we know they can not be
frightened by the spectre of impossible free trade.'*

Mr. Stevenson, writing from Bloomington, Illinois,
October 29th, gave his ^^ unqualified approval '' to the
views of his associate on the Democratic National
ticket, and added :

^^The greatest power conferred upon human govern-
ment is that of taxation. All the great struggles of the
past for a broader political liberty have looked towards
the limitation of this power by right to tax — ^a right
which should always be limited by the necessities of
the Government, and the benefits of which may be

OF HEKBY CLAT AND SIKOE. 173

fihared by alL Whenever this power is used to draw
tribute ft'om the many for the benefit of the tew, or
when part of the people are oppressed in order that the
remainder may prosper unduly, equality is lost sight of.
It is plain that our present inequitable system of tariff
taxation has promoted the growth of such conditions in
our land, favored though it has l>een by an industrious
and enterprising people, a productive soil, and the
highest development of political liberty. If the benefi-
ciaries of this system shall be able to add a new tenure
of power to those they have already enjoyed, the de-
velopment of these unfavorable conditions must continue
until the power to tax will be lodged in those who are
willing and able to pay for the perpetuation of privi-
leges originally conferred by a confiding people for the
preservation inviolate of their own Government. There
is no longer pretext or excuse for the maintenance of a
war tariff in times of peace, and more than a quarter of
a century after armed conflict has ceased. The platform
of the National Democracy demands the reform of this
system and the adoption in its place of one which will
insure equality to all our people. I am in full and
hearty accord with these purposes.''

Still the serious discussion or sober consideration of
the issues raised by the platforms of the two parties
was not the determining cause of the campaign. For
great as was the prosperity of the country and excellent
as was the administration of President Harrison, other
and extraneous matters contributed to, if they did not
directly cause, the Republican defeat. Cleveland and
Stevenson received 277 electoral votes, to 145 for Har-
rison and Reid, and 22 for Weaver and Field, the

198 THE TABIFF IN THE DAYS

original Argument in favor of protective dnties was that
they were necessary to foster infant industries by pre-
venting ruinous competition from abroad until they
could secure a hold on the home market and thus be-
come self-sustaining, and it was again and again pre-
dicted by the earlier advocates of the system that a few
years of public support would enable them to do this.
But the present bill is based upon precisely the oppo-
site view. It is framed upon the assumption that as
our industries grow older they grow weaker and more
dependent upon the bounty of the Government and the
forced contributions of the people who purchase and
consume their products ; and accordingly we find that,
as a general rule, the important increases in the rat^ of
duty are made with a view of still further protecting^
the products of our oldest industries, such as manufac-
tures of iron and steel, woolen goods, cotton goods,
manufactures of flax, hemp, etc. If it be true that these
old industries need more protection now than they
needed a hundred years ago, it must be because they
have been existing undei* an unnatural and unhealthy
system and have lost that spirit of self-reliance and in-
dependence which is essential to the permanent growth
and prosperity of every business enterprise. Thirty
years ago, after a considerable period of low taxes upon
imported goods, when it was proposed to increase rates
in order to secure revenue, it was not suggested by the
most extreme advocates of the protective system that
our industries required anything like such high rates of
duty as are imposed by this biU.

'^ For instance, there are a few persons in this countrj
who believe that they could manufacture tin or tema

OF HEHBT GLAT AND SINGE. 129

plate if those who use that necessary article were com-
pelled by law to pay a higher tax upon it, and accord-
ingly the bill now reported proposes to more than
double the duties. This will injuriously affect the
interests of thousands of laborers now engaged in the
manufacture of tin cans and other vessels used in
canning fruit, vegetables, meats, and fisK in nearly
«very part of the country, and it will constitute a direct
charge upon the producers and consumers of those
various kinds of food ; but the theory upon which this
bill is based takes no account of the welfare of this
great mass of American citizens so long as two or
three firms or corporations insist that the tax will be
beneficial to them.

'' At the same time the bill proposes to make enor-
mous increases in the rates on woolen goods, which all
our people are compelled to purchase and use, and very
lai^ increases in the rates on some kinds of cotton and
linen goods which are absolutely necessary for the
health and comfort of all classes. The increase of
taxes on wool and woolen and worsted goods, including
carpets, amounts to about $15,500,000 per annum, esti-
mated upon the importations of the last fiscal year ; but
in fact it will be many times that amount by reason
of the enhanced prices which consumers will be com-
pelled to pay for the domestic product. While the bill
proposes to make this large addition to the tax on woolen
clothing and carpets, it also proposes to abolish the
internal revenue taxes to the amount of $8,860,994.75
on manufactured chewing and smoking tobacco and
snuff, articles which certainly can not be classed among
the necessaries of life. While we would be willing

laO THE TABIFF IN THE DAYS

to repeal the internal revenue taxes on tobacco in con-
nection with the reductions upon other articles which
the people are obliged to use, as was proposed in the
bill which passed the last House, we can not agree to a
measui^e which provides for the abolition of any part of
such taxes and at the same time increases the rates of
duty of cotton, woolen, and linen clothing, and on
earthenware, glassware, table cutlery, and many forms
of iron and steel which can not be dispensed with.
^^ We can not undertake here to point out in detail the
numerous increases in the rates of duty on imported
goods which this bill proposes to make, but a few will
suffice to show the general character of the measure
and the purpose of its authors and supporters. The
lowest grades of woolen yarn, worth not over 30 cents
per pound, are to be subjected to a duty of 112 per
cent, while the most costly yam will pay 72 per cent.
One grade of coarse, cheap blankets will be required to
pay 106 per cent, but the finest blankets will pay 72
per cent. The coarsest and cheapest woolen hats will
be subject to a duty of 111 per cent, and the finest
to 66 per cent. Women's and children's cheapest dress
goods with cotton warp are to be taxed 106 per cent,
and the finest 73 per cent The lowest grade of woolen
cloths will pay 125 per cent, and the highest grade
86 per cent. The cheapest qualities of knit goods for
underwear range from 112 to 138 per cent, but the
finest and most expensive will pay 78 percent Woolen
shawls of the coarest and lowest grade used by the
poorest people, will pay 185 per cent, duty, and worsted
goods of the lowest grade will pay 180 per cent while
the highest grade will pay 90 per cent.

OF HENBT CLAT AND SINCE. 131

'^ There are many increases of the rates on iron and
steel and scarcely any reduction on articles which can
be imported at all under the existing rates. The re-
ductions in this sdiedole, .as £l ..general rule, will not
diminish taxation to any appreciable extent, while all
the increases are so arranged as to obstruct importations
and enhance the prices of the domestic articles of the
same kind. On common table cutlery the new rates of
duty imposed by this bill are very largely in excess of
the old ones under which our manufacturing establishi
ments have been successfully carried on for many years,
and on the cheaper grades of pocket knives, and razors
especially, the rates are greatly increased.

^When the existing tariff was enacted in 1888,
large increases were made in the rates of duty on earth*
enware and glassware, and this was justified upon the
ground that the law then passed abolished the duty
upon the packages in which these articles were shipped
into this country ; and it was contended that in view of
this fact the actual net increase of duty would be com-
paratively small. Experience has shown, however, that
notwithstanding the abolition of the duty on packages
there was a large increase of taxation in this schedule
under that act, and therefore there ought now to be a
reduction even if the packages remain free. But at the
present session of CJongress a bill has passed the House,
and is now pending in the Senate, reimposing the du-
ties on the packages, and the bill reported by the major-
ity proposes to make still further increases in the rates
of duty upon the goods, especially upon glass and glass-
ware. Common window glass, not exceeding 16 by 24
inches square, is increased to 128 per cent; not exceed-

139 THE TABIFF IN THE BAYS

log 24 by 80 inches sqoare is raised to over 185 per
cent and all sizes above that are raised to over 188 per
cent while there are very large increases upon bottles
and various other manufactores of glass.

'^ Camel's hair, a raw material extensively used in this
country in the manufacture of certain kinds of goods,
and which has been admitted free of duty for a great
many years, is by this bill taken from the free list and
subjected to a tax of twelve cents per pound, which is
equivalent to 77 per cent ad valorenu During the last
fiscal year we imported, free of duty/ 6,648,097 pounds
of this material, which is absolutely necessary to enable
some of our manufacturing establishments to carry on
their business and supply the goods they are now mak-
ing for their customers ; but if this bill passes and the
same quantity is imported next year it will cost tha
people $797,771.64 in addition to the value of the hair
itsell

^'The bill proposes to make large increases in the
duties on carpels wools, and take silver ores containing
lead from the free list and subject the lead contained in
the silver ore to a duty of 1^ cents per pound, not
because we need the revenue, but for the sole purpose
of preventing these articles from being imported into
this country. Last year we imported direct from the
States and Republics of Central and South America
and the Republic of Mexico many million pounds of
this wool, and still more by way of London and other
European ports, and from Mexico silver ores bearing
lead of the value of $6,779,160. Our total importations
of carpet wools from all countries amounted to 96,556,-
466 pounds, and our total importation of this kind of ore

OF HEKBT CLAT AND BINGE. ^ 133

was $6,951,719. All this wool has been converted into
carpets and other fabrics, and all these ores have been
smelted in the United States by American workmen,
and their importation has been of great benefit to our
people, in addition to the profit realized from the trade
between the different countries. The free admission of
fluxing ores from Mexico has enabled our citizens to
establish and maintain large smelting works at El Paso,
Texas, Argentine, Kansas, Newark, N. J«, Kansas City,
Mo., and a great many other places. If this bill passes
the tax upon 66,000 tons of silver ore, the amount im-
ported last year, will be over $672,000, which the Gov-
ernment does not need and which will benefit nobody
in this country. The bill in fact increases the rates of
duty on all classes of wool imported into this country.
"For the further purpose of inducing the far-
mers of the country to believe that they can and
will derive some benefit from the protective policy,
this bill imposes various rates of duty upon certain
important agricultural products, which it is well
known could not be imported to any material extent
with or without duty. For instance, corn is subjected
to a duty of 15 cents a bushel ; corn meal, 20 cents per
bushel; oats, 15 cents per bushel; rye, 10 cents per
bushel; wheat, 25 cents per bushel; wheat fiour, 25
per cent ad valorem ; apples, green or ripe, 25 cents
per bushel; apples, dried, 2 cents per pound; bacon
and hams, 5 cents per pound ; beef, mutton, and pork,
2 cents per pound ; lard, 2 cents per pound, and tallow,
1 cent per pound. We produce a great surplus of all
these articles and many others every year, which we are
compelled to send abroad and sell in the free markets

184 THE TABIFF IN THE DAYS

of the world in competition with similar products of
other coantries. It is impossible to protect the farmer
against foreign competition in his home market^ for he
has no such competition^ and the insertion or retention
of these articles in a tariff bill is a device which will de*
ceive no one who gives a moment^s thought to the
subject.

^^ Under the existing law animals for breeding pur-
poses are admitted free of duty and all others are sub-
ject to a tax of 20 per cent, ad valorem ; but the bill re-
ported proposes largely to increase this tax and make it
specific. It is proposed to levy an import duty of $30
per head on all horses and mules; $10 per head on all
cattle over one year old, and $2 per head on all under
that age, and $1.50 per head on hogs and sheep.
HorseSy valued at $150 and over, will pay a duty of 80
per cent, and all animals imported especially for breed-
ing purposes will still be admitted free, but they must
be of pure blood, of a recognized breed, and must have
been duly registered abroad in the book of records es-
tablished for that breed. All these increases of duties
are claimed to be in the interest of fanners, but in fact
they will be vastly more injurious to them and to dairy-
men than to any other class of our people. Last year
we imported dutiable horses to the number of 52,454,
of the average value of $42.81; cattle, 62,880, of the
average value of $9.68; hogs, 2,896, of the average
value of $3.28; and sheep, 454,010, of the average
value of $2.98. These animals were brought here
mainly, if not entirely, by the farmers themselves, or on
their account, to replenish their stock of work beasts,
milch cows, and sheep herds. This is evident, we

OF HENBT GLAT AND SINGE. 135

think, from the low prices of the animals and the
localities from which they were imported. For in-
stance, nearly all the horses imported came from Mex-
ico and from Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba, and the
Northwest Territory, and the average value of the
29,590 brought from Mexico was $8.80, while the aver-
age value of the 17,470 brought from the Dominion was
only a little over $100. These were not expensive ani-
mals imported for racing purposes, or for use in
pleasure carriages, but ordinary stock such as is used
upon our farms ; and it is evident that the importations
from Mexico were ponies for use on the sheep and cat-
tle ranches of the West. The duty on these Mexican
horses last year amounted to $52,869, but if this bill
passes, and the same number is imported next year, the
duty will amount to $887,700, or nearly three and a
half times their value. The farmer or dairyman who
hereafter imports common cattle for his own use will
be required to pay a duty of over 100 per cent., ac-
cording to the average value of the importations of last
year;, and he can not import an ordinary animal of any
kind for breeding purposes free of duty, as fine stock
may be imported, because such an animal is not pure
bred, and is therefore not registered abroad. How the
fanners are to be helped by the increased duties on live
animals we are wholly unable to see, and, in our opin-
ion, if this bill passes, they will be the first to demand
a restoration of the old rates, or that these importations
may be free.

*^ The bill proposes to admit, free of duty, all sugar
up to and including No. 16 Dutch standard in color,
and pay to the sugar producers in this country a bounty

136 THE TABIFF IN THE DATS

of two cents per pound each year until July 1, 1905, on
their product Last year these grades of sugar which
are now made free, yielded to the Gk)vemment $54,-
894,181, all of which is now to be surrendered, and the
sugar industry is to become an annual charge upon all
the people who are engaged in other occupations, some
of which are &r more important and all of which are
fully as meritorious as this one. In 1888, which is the
last year for which we have complete returns, the sugar
product in this country was 875,855,877 pounds, so
that even should there be no increased production
under the bounty system the sum which the people are
to be compelled to donate each year for the support of
this favorite industry will be $7,520,000, or $118,000,-
000 during the fifteen years. But the very object of
the bounty is to encourage the production of this ar-
ticle, and its advocates claim that in a few years it will
result in a domestic supply equal to the whole demand
for home consumption. In addition to the home prod-
uct we imported and consumed during the last fiscal
year 2,700,421,802 pounds of sugar not above No. 16 in
color, making a total annual consumption, including
domestic and imported, of 8,076,277,079 pounds, and
therefore, if the system results as its advocates predict^
the annual payment out of the Treasury will be $61,-
528,426, even without any increase in the amount now
consumed. We protest against the gross favoritism
and injustice of such a policy, and we deny the moral
or constitutional right of the Oovemment to tax the
people who grow com, wheat, cotton, rye, oats^ and
other agricultural products for the purpose of raising
money to be given to those who produce sugar or any
other article.

OF HENBT CLAY AND SINCE. 137

^' It is impossible to state with entire accuracy how
much the bill increa/ses taxes upoa imported goods, for
the reason that there are many large increases of taxa-
tion made by it which are not exhibited in the table
submitted by the Committee. This table shows that,
omitting the sugar schedule, there has been added to
the duties on the articles still remaining on the dutia-
ble list the sum of $40,055,152.88; but in addition to
this, after January 1, 1894, the duties on brown and
bleached linens, ducks, canvas, handkerchiefs, or other
woven fabrics, composed of flax, hemp, jute, or of
which flax, hemp, or jute, or either of them, shall be
the component material of cheap value, containing one
hundred or more threads to the square inch, counting
either the warp or filling, will be increased to the
amount of $1,574,954.57 more than is shown by the
tables ; and after July 1, 1891, the duty on tin or teme
plate will be $8,871,878.67 greater than it was last year
upon the same importation, and the increase in the
tobacco schedule i% as nearly as we can calculate it,
$6,551,855.41 more than the tables show. In our opin-
ion the increase in the tobacco schedule, resulting
mainly from the imposition of a duty of $2 per pound
on unstemmed leaf for cigar wrappers, will be $16,305,-
925 instead of $9,754,069.59, as shown by the tables,
and we are confident that an analysis of our importar
tions of that article for a series of years past will sus-
tain our position. Even the comparatively brief exami-
nation we have been able to make has disclosed other
increases not shown by the calculations contained in
the tables, amounting to the sum of over $8,000,000,
and there are many others which can not be accurately

238 THE TABIFF IN THE DATS

ascertained for the want of sufficient data as to prices
and quantities of importations of last year. Adding
these amounts to the $40,055,162.88, shows a total in-
crease of duties on articles still dutiable, outside of the
sugar schedule, of about $65,000,000, and we are satis-
fied it is more than that We do not mean to assert
that the bill actually increases the customs revenue
$65,000,000 over what it is under existing law, but
that it proposes to impose upon the articles it leaves
upon the dutiable list, except sugar and molasses, that
sum in excess of the amount collected on the same
schedules last year. It places upon the free list articles
which yielded a revenue of $6,089,969 during the last
fiscal year, and it makes a reduction of $54,922,110.56
on sugar and molasses, and these two sums, amounting
to $60,962,079.68, being deducted from the $65,000,000
leave a net increase of more than $4,000,000 in tariff
taxation under this bill. While the bill proposes to
transfer from the dutiable schedules to the free list arti-
cles which last year yielded a revenue of $6,039,969.07,
it proposes also to transfer from the free list to the
dutiable list certain articles, principally raw materials
used in manufactures, which, according to the importa-
tions during the last fiscal year, will yield a revenue of
nearly $8,500,000.

The bill, came to a vote, on the question of passage,
on May 2l8t, its opponents making a fiual effort at
its defeat on the following motion : Mr. Carlisle moved
that ^^the pending bill be recommitted to the
Committee on Ways and Means, with instructions to
report the same back to the House at the earliest
possible day so amended by substitute or otherwise as

OF HENBY GLAT AND SINGS. 189

to reduce the revenueA of the Government by reducing
the burdens of taxation upon the people, instead of
reducing the revenues by imposing prohibitory rates
of taxation upon imported goods,'' — which was
disagreed to, yeas 140, all Democrats; nays 164,
all Bepublicans. The bill was then passed — yeas 164,
all Bepublicans ; nays 142, all Democrats but two, one
Republican and one Independent, while twenty-one
members, six Bepublicans and fifteen Democrats did
not vote. New England cast twenty-one votes for the
bill and three against it; the Middle States, yeas
forty-eight, nays twenty-eight ; the Western and North-
western States, yeas seventy-five, nays thirty-one; the
Southern and Southwestern, yeas eleven, nays seventy-
eight, and the Pacific, yeas nine, nays two.

The biU was reported by Mr. Morrill from the
Senate Finance Committee on June 18th, and was
constantly considered, with various intervals, in Com-
mittee of the Whole, until September 8th. An interest-
ing colloquy occurred between Senators McPherson and
Sherman on July S6th, occasioned by the motion
of the former to recommit the bill to the Finance
Committee with instructions to prepare a bill which
would ^ reduce the average ad valorem rate of duty on
dutiable articles, based upon the importations of 1889,
so as not to exceed the average ad valorem war tariff
rate of 1864," which he stated to be 89.69 per cent.
To this Mr. Sherman replied, ^* that while the rate of
duty on dutiable articles is a little less than 62 per
cent, under the pending bill, yet on the whole list of
articles taken together the avei*age rate of duty is only
about 27 per cent Nearly fifty per cent, or half our

140 THE TABIFF IN THE DAYS

importatdons under the proposed act, are entirely free
of duty, while under the act of 1864 only fifteen
to eighteen per cent of the articles were free
of duty. The value of the goods that have heretofore
paid duty that are made free by this bill is $108,919,
907 ; which added to the value of those free now makes
the grand aggregate of $365,494,573 as the value of all
of the articles that will be admitted free of duty under
the new law. This is much the largest free list ever
known in the history of the country, and almost equals
the value of the articles on which duties will be levied
by this bill, for while $865,494,587 of imported goods
are admitted free of duty, according to the figures of
last year, $390,437,117 are subjec*: to duty.""

^'Now, the striking difference between the tariff
policy of 1864 and 1890," said Mr. Sherman, "is this :
In 1864 we were involved in war; we levied tariff
duties on almost every article of necessity, as well as
those articles that we manufacture in this country, and
therefore we levied duties not only on sugar, but on
tea, coffee, and almost everything else, and when at
that time the duties amounted to 46 per cent, on the
average, they were upon all articles imported practi-
cally. The free list was then only 10, or 12, or 15 per
cent, but now on account of the change of con-
ditions, from the fact that we wish to admit duty free
all articles that we can not produce in this country, we
admit substantially one-half of all imported goods
into this country free of duty, and we propose an
average duty of 52 per cent, upon those articles that
we think we ought to make and can make in this
country, and for which we seek by these duties not

OF HENBY CJJlY AND SIKGE. Ul

only to get sufficient revenue to carry on the Govem-
menty but also to protect and foster and build up
American industry at the same time/'

The motion to recommit was lost — ^yeas nineteen, all
Democrats ; nays twenty-nine, all Republicans.

On September 8th, what was known as ^^ the Reci-
procity Amendment," by Mr. Aldrich, of Rhode Island,
was agreed to — ^yeas 87, all Republicans ; najrs 28, all
Democrats but two. This policy had been recom-
mended by the International American Conference then
in session in this country, and was in keeping with the
long cherished policy of Mr. Blaine and the recommen-
dations of President Harrison in his special message to
Congress of June 19, 1890, in which he said :

^^ It has been so often and so persistently stated that
our tariff laws offer an insurmountable barrier to a
lai^ exchange of products with the Latin-American
nations that I deem it proper to call especial attention
to the fact that more than 87 per cent, of the products
of these nations sent to our ports are now admitted
free. If sugar is placed upon the free list, practically
every important article exported from those states will
be given untaxed access to our markets, except wool
The real difficulty in the way of negotiating profitable
reciprocity treaties is that we have given freely so much
that would have had value in the mutual concessions
which such treaties imply. I cannot doubt, however,
that the present advantages which the products of these
near and friendly states enjoy in our markets — though
they are not by law exclusive — will, with other consid-
erations, favorably dispose them to adopt such meas-
ures, by treaty, or otherwise, as will tend to equalize
and greatly enlarge our mutual exchanges."

142 THE TABIFF IN THE DAY8

The Aldricli amendment was also agreed to in open
Senate — jeaA 88, nays 29 ; and the bill was passed, as
amended, on September 11th — yeas 40, all Republicans,
nays, 29, all Democrats. On September 15th the
House declined to agree to the Senate amendments and
a Committee of Conference was appointed — ^Messrs.
Aldrich, Sherman, Allison, Hiscock, Vorhees, Vance,
and Carlisle, for the Senate, and Messrs. McKinley,
Burrows, Bayne, Dingley, McMillan, Flower, and
Turner, of Georgia, for the House. The bill as it
passed the House contained nearly 4,000 items and was
amended by the Senate in 445 particulars, more than a
hundred of which were purely verbal, and most of the
others so slight and unimportant that an agreement
was quickly reached. The changes by the Senate in
the metal schedule were important, and for the most
part acceded to by the House conferees, while in
woolens, silks, flax, wood, and paper the Senate con-
ferees conceded the demands of the House. Sugar
evoked the most serious contention, and in this sched-
ule a compromise was effected ; sugar up to No. 16
Butch standard was made free, and that above this
grade dutiable at a half cent per pound, with an addi-
tional rate of one-tenth of a cent upon all sugars coming
from countries where an export bounty is paid to the
domestic producers. Binding twine, after much dispu-
tation, was finally made dutiable at seven-tenths of a
cent a pound, and sulphuric acid, for agricultural pur-
poses, was made free. The Aldrich reciprocity amend-
ment was accepted by the House conferees ; while the
internal revenue sections were in the main accepted by
tile Senate Committee as the House had passed them.

OF HENBT CLAY AHD SINCE. 143

The bill, as finally agreed upon, was protective in
every paragraph, and American in every line and word.
It recognized and fully enforced the economic principle
of protection, which the Republican party from its birth
had steadfastly advocated, and that had always secured
to the country the greatest prosperity.

The Democratic members of the Conference Com-
mittee declined to unite in the report, but it was
nevertheless accepted by both branches of Congress.
The House concurred in it on September 27th — ^yeas
152, all Republicans ; nays 81, all Democrats but two.
Thirty-eight members were paired and fifty-five Demo-
crats did not vote. In the Senate the report was
adopted on September 80th — ^yeas 38, all Republicans;
nays 27, all Democrats, except three ; and twenty-two
Senators were paired and did not vote. The law was
approved by President Harrison on the following day,
and, except where otherwise especially provided, went
into effect on October 6, 1890.

But its passage was hardly effected before the general
election occurred, and at this the Republicans were
badly defeated. The House of Representatives of the
Mfty-second Congress, elected in 1890, was overwhelm-
ingly Democratic, that party electing 2S5 of the 832
members.

President Harrison gave the tariff due and careful
consideration in his second annual message at the begin-
ning of the second session of the Fifty-first Congress,
December 1, 1890. In the course of his suggestions he
said :

^ The general trade and industrial conditions through-
out the country during the year have shown a marked

144 THE TABIFF IN THE DATS

improvement For many years prior to 1888 the mer-
chandise balances of foreign trade have been largely in
our favor, but daring that year and the year following
they turned against us. It is very gratifying to know
that the last fiscal year again shows a balance in our
favor of over $68,000,000. There were three hundred
less fSsdlures reported in October, 1890, than in the
same month of the preceding year, with liabilities dimin-
ished by about $5,000,000. The value of our exports
of domestic merchandise during the last year was over
$116,000,000 greater than the preceding year, and was
only exceeded once in our history. About $100,000,000
of this excess was in agricultural products. The pro-
duction of pig iron — always a good gauge of general
prosperity — is shown by a recent census bulletin to have
been 168 per cent greater in 1890 than in 1880, and the
production of steel 290 per cent, greater. Mining in
coal has had no limitation except that resulting from
deficient transportation. The general testimony is that
labor is eveiy where fully employed, and the reports for
the last year show a smaller number of employes
affected by strikes and lockouts than in any year since
1884. The depression in the prices of agricultural
products has been greatly relieved, and a buoyant and
hopeful time was beginning to be felt by all our people.
^^The general tariff act has only partially gone into
operation, some of its important provisions being limited
to take effect at dates yet in the future. The general
provisions of the law have been in force less than sixty
days. Its permanent effect upon trade and prices still
largely stands in conjecture. It is curious to know that
the advance in the prices of articles wholly unaffected

OF HSNBY OLkY AKD 8IK0& 145

by the tariff act was by many hastily ascribed to that
act There is neither wisdom nor justice in the sugges-
tion that the subject of tariff revision shall be again
opened before this law has had a fair trial It is quite
true that every tariff schedule is subject to objections.
No bill was ever framed, I suppose, that in all of its
rates and classifications had the full approval even of a
party caucus. Such legislation is always and neces-
sarily the product of compromise as to details, and the
present law is no exception. But in its general scope
and effect I think it will justify the support of those
who believe that American legislation should conserve
and defend American trade and the wages of American
workmen.

^^The critidsms of the bill that have come to us from
foreign sources may well be rejected for repugnancy.
If these critics really believe that the adoption by us of
a free trade policy, or of tariff rates having reference
solely to revenue, would diminish the participation of
their own countries in the commerce of the world, their
advocacy and promotion by speech and other forms of
organized effort of this movement among our people is a
rare exhibition of unselfishness in trade. And on the
other hand, if they sincerely believe that the adoption
of a protective-tariff policy by this country inures to
their profit and our hurt, it is noticeably strange that
they should lead the outcry against the authors of a
policy so helpful to their countrymen, and crown with
their favor those who would snatch from them a sub-
stantial share of a trade with other lands already in-
i^equate to their necessities. There is no disposition
among any of our people to promote prohibitory or

14e THE TABIFF IN THE DAYS

retalialibiy legislation. Our policies are adopted not to
the hurt of others, but to secure for ourselves those
advantages that fairly grow out of our favored position
as a nation. Our form of government, with its incident
of universal suffrage, makes it imperative that we shall
save our working people from the agitations and dis-
tresses which scant work and wages that have no
margin for comfort always beget But after all this is
done it will be found that our markets are open to
friendly commercial exchanges of enormous value to
the other great powers. From the time of my induc-
tion into office the duty of using every power and
influence given by law to the Executive Department
for the development of larger markets for our products,
especially our farm products, has been kept constantly
in mind, and no effort has been or will be spared to
promote that endL We are under no disadvantage in
.any foreign market, except that we pay our workmen
and workwomen better wages than are paid elsewhere
— better abstractly, better relatively to the cost of the
necessaries of life. I do not doubt that a very largely
increased foreign trade is accessible to us without
bartering for it either our home market for such pro-
ducts of the farm and shop as our own people can
supply, or the wages of our working people.''

Several labor bills were considered by the Fifty-first
Congress. On August 29, 1890, Hon. W. J. Gonnell,
of Nebraska, reported a bill to the effect that eight
hours should constitute a day's work for all employes
of the Grovemment, reference being especially had to
the District of Columbia, and providing severe penal-
ties for all violations of the law. The House rejected

OF HENBY ChAY AND SINCE. 193

of duty amotintied to $444,544,211, a decrease from the
preceding year of $13,455,447. Internal revenue re-
ceipts exceeded those of the preceding year by $7,147,-
445.82."

His recommendations upon the tari£E are especially
noteworthy because of the endorsement he gave in ad-
vance to a bill which had not yet been introduced in
Congress; perhaps the first instance of the kind in the
history of the Government. It had been prepared by
the Democratic majority of the Ways and Means Com-
mittee of the House during its vacation, after the ad-
journment of the special session on October 6th. The
bill as a whole had not yet been given to the press,
nor had any comprehensive analjrsis of it been pre-
sented, but still the President heartily endorsed it in
the following confident strains :

^^ After a hard struggle tariff reform is directly be-
fore us. Nothing so important claims our attention
and nothing so clearly presents itself as both an op-
portunity and a duty — ^an opportunity to deserve the
gratitude of our fellow-citizens and a duty imposed
upon us by our oft-repeated professions and by the
emphatic mandate of the peopla After full discus-
sion, our countrymen have spoken in favor of this re-
form, and they have confided the work of its accom-
plishment to the hands of those who are solemnly
pledged to it If there is anything in the theory of
a representation in public places of the people and
their desires, if public officers are really the servants
of the people, and if political promises and professions
have any binding force, our failure to give the relief
so long awaited will be sheer recreancy. Nothing

IM THE TAEIFF IN THE DATS

should interrene to distnot our attenlfion or disturb
our effort until this refonn is accomplished by wise
and careful legislation. While we should staunchly ad-
here to the principle that only the necessity of revenue
justifies the imposition of tariff duties and other Federal
taxation, and that they should be limited by strict
economy, we can not close our eyes to the fact that con-
ditions have grown up among us which in justice and
fairness call for discriminating care in the distribution
of such duties and taxation as the emergencies of our
Government actually demand. Manifestly, if we are to
aid the people directly through tariff reform, one of its
most obvious features should be a reduction in present
tariff charges upon the necessaries of life. The benefits
of such a ]*eduction would be palpable and substantial,
seen and felt by thousands who would be better fed
and better clothed and better sheltered. These gifts
should be the willing benefactions of a Government
whose highest function is the promotion of the welfare
of the peopla Not less closely related to our people's
prosperity and well-being is the removal of restrictions
upon the importation of the raw materials necessary to
our manufactures. The world should be open to our
National ingenuity and enterprise. This can not be
while Federal legislation, through the imposition of a
high tariff, forbids to American manufacturers as cheap
materials as those used by their competitors. It is
quite obvious that the enhancement of the price of our
manufactured products resulting from this policy not
only confines the market for these products within our
own borders, to the direct disadvantage of our manu-
facturers, but also increases their cost to our citizens.

OF HENBT CLAY AND BINGE. ^' 1*6

The interests of labor are certamly, though indirectly,
involved in this feature of our tariff system. The sharp
competition and active stru^le among our manufiu^
tarers to supply the limited demand for their goods
soon fill the narrow market to which they are confined. ^
Then follows a suspension of work in mill and factories,
a discharge of employes, and distress in the homes of
our workingmen. Even if the often-disproved assertion
could be made good that a lower rate of wages would
result from free raw materials and low tariff duties, the
intelligence of our workingmen leads them quickly to
discover that their steady employment, permitted by
free raw materials, is the most important factor in their
relation to tariff legislation. A measure has been pre-
pared by the appropriate Congressional Committee em-
bodying tariff reform on the lines herein suggested,
which will be promptly submitted for legislative action.
It is the result of much patriotic and unselfish work,
and I believe it deals with its subject consistently and
as thoroughly as existing conditions permit I am satis-
fied that the reduced tariff duties provided for in the
proposed legislation, added to existing internal-revenue
taxation, will, in the near future, though perhaps not
immediately, produce sufficient revenue to meet the
needs of the Government. The Committee, after full
consideration, and to provide against a temporary de-
ficiency which may exist before the business of the
country adjusts itself to the new tariff schedules, have
wisely embraced in their plan a few additional in-
ternal-revenue taxes, including a small tax upon in-
comes derived from certain corporate investments.
These new assessments are not only absolutely just

Id6 THE TABIFF IK THE DAYS

and easily borne, but they have the farther merit of
being such as can be remitted without unfavorable
bilsiness disturbance whenever the necessity of their
imposition no longer exists. In my great desire for
^the success of this measure, I can not restrain the sug-
gestion that its success can only be attained by means
of unselfish counsel on the part of the friends of tariff
reform, and as a result of their willingness to sub-
ordinate personal desires and ambitions to the general
good. The local interests affected by the proposed re-
form are so numerous and so varied that if all are
insisted upon the legislation embodying the reform
must inevitably &iL In conclusion, my intense feeling
of responsibility impels me to invoke for the manifold
interests of a generous and confiding people the most
scrupulous care, and to pledge my willing support to
every legislative effort for the advancement of the
greatness and prosperity of our beloved country."

On December 19, 1898, Mr. Wilson, Chairman of the
Committee on Ways and Means, introduced the general
tariff bill of the session — entitled ^^a bill to reduce
taxation, to provide revenue for the Government, and
for other purposes." He submitted with it an explana-
tory statement of the purposes of the majority, from
which the following clauses are taken :

'^ This bill, on which the Committee has expended
much patient and anxious labor, is not offered as a com-
plete response to the mandate of the American people.
It no more professes to be purged of all protection than
to be free of all error in its complex and manifold de-
tails. However we may deny the existence of any
legislative pledge or the right of any Congress to make

OP HENRY CLAT AND SINCE. 197

such pledge for the contintiance of duties that cany
with them more or less acknowledged protection, we are
forced to consider that great interests do exist whose
existence and prosperity it is no part of our reform
either to imperil or to curtail We believe, and we have
the warrant of our own past experience for believing^
that reduction of duties will not injure, but give more
abundant life to all oiir great manufacturing industries,
however much they may dread the change. But in
dealing with the tariff, as with every other long-standing
abuse that has interwoven itself with our social or in-
dustrial system, the legislator must always remember
that in the beginning temperate reform is safest, having
in itself ^ the principle of growth.'

^ When Congress began to repeal war burdens and to
relieve manufacturers of the internal taxes, which they
had used to secure compensating duties on like foreign
products, there arose a demand throughout the country,
without respect to party, for a reduction of the war
tariff. Unable to resist this demand, the protected in-
dustries baffled and thwarted any reduction of con-
sequence until 1872, when they defeated a House bill
that did make a substantial reduction by substituting a
Senate bill which carried a horizontal cut of ten per
cent As soon, however, as the elections of 1874 gave
the next House to the Democratic party, that reduction
was repealed by the outgoing RepablicanSy and rates re-
stored to what they were before 1872.

^ The history of American industry shows that during
no other period has there been a more healthy and
rapid development of our manufacturing industry than
during the fifteen years of low tariff from 1846 to 1861^

198 THE TABIFF IK THE DAYS

nor a more healthy and harmonious growth of agricul-
ture and all the other great industries of the country.
No chapter in our political experience carries with it a
more salutary lesson than this^ and none could appeal
more strongly to law makers to establish a just and
rational system of public revenues^ neither exhausting
agriculture by constant blood-letting nor keeping manu-
facturers alternating between chills and fevers by arti-
ficial pampering. In this direction alone lies stability,
concord of sections, and of great industries. We have
already said that public discussion may disclose errors
of minor detail in the schedules of our bilL To escape
such errors would require so thorough and minute a
knowledge of all the divisions^ sub-divisions, complex
and manifold masses and involutions of our chemical,
textile, metal, and other industries that no committee of
Congress, no matter how extended the range of their
personal knowledge or how laborious and painstaking
their efforts, could ever hope to possess. We have not
forgotten that we represent the people, who are* the
many, as well as the protected interests, who are the
few, and while we have dealt with the latter in no spirit
of unfriendliness, we have felt that it was our duty, and
not their privilege, to make the tariff schedules. Those
who concede the right of beneficiaries to fix their own
bounties must necessarily commit to them the framing
and verbiage of the laws by which those bounties are
secured for them. A committee of Congress thus be-
comes merely the amanuensis of the protected interests.
*^ We have believed that the first step toward a reform
of the tariff should be a release of taxes on the materi-
als of industry. There can be no substantial and bene-

OF HENRY CLAY AND SINGE. 199

ficial reduction upon the necessary clothing and other
comforts of the American people, nor any substantial
and beneficial enlargement of the field of American la-
bor as long as we tax the materials and processes of pro-
duction. Every tax upon the producer falls with in-
creased force upon the consumer. Every tax on the
producer in this country is a protection to his competit-
ors in all other countries, and so narrows his markets as
to limit the number and lessen the wages of those to
whom he can give employment. Every cheapening in
the cost or enlargement of the supply of his raw materi-
als, while primaiily inuring to the benefit of the manu-
facturer himself, passes under free competition immedi-
ately and passes entirely to the consumer, who very soon
gets even mcKre benefit out of it than such reductions
seem to carry, because with the rapid widening of his
market the manufacturer is able to sell at a smaller pro-
fit It is therefore a very narrow and shortsighted view
which supposes that we release the duties on iron ore,
coa^ wool^ and other like articles, solely for the benefit
of those who manufacture our iron, steel, woolen, and
other fabrics.

^^ This House in two Congresses in recent years hav-
ing, after full debate, passed laws putting wool upon the
free list^ it is not deemed necessary in this report to at-
tempt a re«ti^tement of the reasons for doing so. It is
enough to say that the tariff upon wool, while bringing
no real benefit to the American wool-grower, least of all
to the American fanner, who, in any balancing of ac-
counts, must see that he yearly pays out a good dollar
for every doubtful dime he may receive under its opera-
tion, has disastrously hampered our manufacturing in-

200 THE TABIFF IN THE DATS

dustry and made crael and relentless war upon the
health, the comfort, and the productive energy of the
American people. Logs are already on the free list
We have gone a step further and put undressed lumber
generally on that list This may serve to cheapen and
improve the dwelling houses of some of our people, but
it is justified if it shall accomplish nothing more than ix>
delay the rapid destruction of American forests. We have
also placed flax and hemp, unshackled, on the free list, for
the reasons stated above, that we may give to the Amer-
ican worldngman untaxed material to work with, and
that we may give the finished product as far as possible
to the consumer with but a single tax, and that a moder-
ate one, instead of a medley and cumulation of taxes
gathered during the process of production. In addition
to these so-K^led raw materials, we have released from
tariff duties certain important articles and manufactures
which we have shown our capacity to produce more
cheaply than any other country, such as pig copper and
the important agricultural implements. Any article of
manufacture which can sustain the competition of like
foreign articles in other markets can defy such competi-
tion in the home market, and is not protected by the
duty, but by its own intrinsic superior cheapness or
quality. In the earthenware schedule we have made
substantial reductions, still leaving rates as high as were
deemed necessary in the war tariff. In common window
glass, where close combinations have kept up the prices
to consumers under a scale of duties averaging more than
one hundred per cent, we have made a reduction of
about one-half. Upon the larger sizes of plate glass,
where the duties were even higher, we have made a re-

OF HENBY GLAY AND SINGE. 201

duction of about one-third. In the iron and steel sched*
vley beginning with free ore, and a duty of 22^ per cent,
on pig iron, we have reported a scale of duties consider^
ably below those of the existing law, graduated accord-
ing to the degree of manufacture which should bring
benefit to the consumer without calling for any halt in
the imperial progress of that great industry in our coun-
try. The duty upon steel rails has been put at twenty-
five per cent which, according to the reports of our De-
partment of Labor, quite compensates for all difference in
the cost of production in this country and abroad. There
seems to be an authentic repoi-t that the pool of Amer-
ican rail-makers which, under the shelter of the present
duty of $13.44 per ton, has kept up prices to the
American consumer far beyond the cost of production
and legitimate profits, bas been reorganized to continue
the regulation of their prices above the proper market
ratea As all shippers, and especially American farm-
ers, are vitally interested in cheapening the cost of
transportation, rates of duty upon steel rails should be
adjusted so as to protect them from monopoly prices
and monopoly combinations. Upon tin plate the duty
has been gauged with reference to the revenue it will
bring into the Treasury, and the difference between this
duty and that upon the black plate has been lessened
with a view to discourage what may not unjustly
be called the bogus industry of making American tin
plate by.thB mere dipping in this country of the im-
ported black plate. In the sugar schedule we should
have preferred to wipe out at a single legislative stroke
the existing bounty system. We believe it to be con-
trary to the spirit of our institutions, and can conceive

9M THE TABIFF IN THB DAIS

of no cirownatances under which we should have
advocated or approved its introduction into our laws.
We have found it existing there, as we find it virtually
existing in every other schedule of the tarifE, and deal-
ing with it in its more open and offensive form, in the
same spirit we have dealt with other schedules where
large property interests are at stake, we have reported
a provision for its repeal by such stages as shall
gradually obliterate it from our laws, while permitting
those who have invested large means, under the ex-
pectation of its continuance, reasonable time in which
they may prepare to take their stand with the other
industries of the country.

^' Duties upon imported tobacco leaf suitable for cigar
wrappers, which were so advanced by the act of 1890,
have been placed at such figures, as, after careful in-
vestigation, were deemed likely to produce most
revenue to the Treasury, but while revenue alone has
been the object sought, their amount is so high that no
domestic producer need, claim that there is not abun-
dant protection and to spare for his product m theuL
Of the staple agricultural products, including meats
and provisions, we are such large exporters and must
continue to be such large exporters that any duties
upon them are useless for protection and fruitless
for revenue, and generally can only be imposed for the
purpose of deluding the less intelligent of our farmers
into the belief that they are receiving some considera-
tion and benefit under the tariff, although the prices of
their products are fixed in the world's market in com-
petition with like products produced by the cheapest
labor of the world. To the farmers of the country

OF HENRT OLAT AND SINC£. 203

we liave given untaxed agricnltaral implements^ bind-
ing twine, free salt and untaxed cotton ties, for the
additional reason in this last case that cotton is the
largest export crop of the country, sold abroad in com-
petition with the cheap labor of India and of Egypt,
and we believe that it is enough for the private tax-
gatherer to follow it in the markets of his own country
without pursuing it to all the markets of the world.
As cotton bagging can be used but once, we have
thought it but just to extend the draw-back system to
such bagging made of jute butts when used upon
exported cotton, a privilege which the exporter of
wheat can already enjoy, coupled with the further ad-
vantage in his case that the same bags may be used for
successive exportations of grain.

^ The placing of wool upon the free list has Justified
a very substantial reduction of the duties on woolen
goods. Of the woolen tariff it may be truly said, as
was said of the woolen tariff of 1882, ^that it is the
masterpiece of the ultra restrictionists and exhibits all
the worse features of the system.' Although the im-
ports of 1892 show an average duty of 95.82 per cent,
in the woolen schedule, it can not be said that woolen
manufacture has been a flourishing industry in this
country, or that the American wool-grower has secured
remunerative prices for his wool. With free wool we
anticipate great benefits to consumers of woolen goods,
a revival of the woolen industry, such as that which
foUowed the tariff of 1857, and a steadier and better
market for the American wool-grower. We have
placed the duties upon woolen fabrics at forty per cent.,
but with a proviso for a uniform cut of five per cent,

204 THE TABIFF IN THE DATS

with a lapse of five years, beginning on the first day of
July, 1896.

*^ A most important change in the bill proposed from
the present law will be found in the general substitution
of ad valorem for specific duties. This must always be
the characteristic of a revenue tistriff levied upon a large
range of articles, especially when they include the plain
necessaries of life.

^' It is the purpose of the present bill to repeal in toto
section three of the tariff act of October 1, 1890, com*
monly but erronneously called its reciprocity pro-
vision. That act placed sugar, molasses, coffee, tea and
hides on the free list, but authorized the President^
should he be satisfied that the government of any
other country producing such articles imposed duties
upon the agricultural or other products of the United
States which he might deem reciprocally unequal and
imreasonable, to suspend the provision under which these
articles were admitted into this country frea This sec-
tion has brought no appreciable advantage to Amer-
ican exporters ; it is not in intention or effect a pro-
vision for reciprocity, but for retaliation. It inflicts
penalties upon the American people by making them
pay higher prices for these articles if the fiscal neces-
sities of other nations compel them to levy duties upon
the products of the United States which, in the opinion
of the President, are reciprocally unequal and unreason-
able. Under the provisions of this section Presidential
proclamations have been issued imposing retaliatory
duties upon the five above-mentioned articles when
coming from certain countries. These proclamations
have natually led to ill-feeling in the countries thus

OF HENRT CLAY AND SINCE. 206

discriminated against^ and to diplomatic correspondence
in which it has been claimed with apparent justice, that
such discriminations were in violation of our solemn
treaty obligations. Moreover, we do not believe that
Congress can rightly vest in the President of the
United States any authority or power to impose or re-
lease taxes on our people by proclamation or otherwise,
or to suspend or dispense with the operation of a law
of Congress."

The minority of the Ways and Means Committee
(Messrs, Beed, Burrows, Payne, Dalzell, Hopkins and
Gear, the Republican members), presented the follow-
ing views in opposition to the proposed law :

'' The most surprising thing about the bill is the fact
that this proposition to raise revenue will lower the
revenue of this country $74,000,000 below the revenue
of 1893, which was only $2,000,000 above our expenses.
This fact and the other fact that by this bill the larger
part of the burden of taxation is transferred from
foreigners, and borne by our own citizens, should always
be kept in mind during the discussion.

^ It imfortunately happens that ' free raw material "
is an elastic term, and what is one man^s free raw ma-
terial is another man^s finished product. The manufac-
turer in Massachusetts is told that he is to be encouraged
by having free lumber to build his factory and to pack
his goods, but inasmuch as that very lumber thus made
free is the Maine manufactarer's finished product, no
wonder the Democrats of Bangor, the mills on the
Penobscot being unable to move a saw, denounced
' class legislation ^ with a new appreciation of what class
legislation really means. And with the dwellers on the

906 THE TABIFF IN THE DAYS

Penobscot sympathize the lumbermen in Wisconsin and
Michigan, the Pacific slope^ Alabama, Georgia and
Florida. So also the miners in Michigan, straggling this
very moment with etarvation, realize th,at the most
odious class legislation there can possibly be is the l^is-
lation which protects labor in the mill and leaves it in
the mines to the charity of the great cities. These so-
called * free raw materials,' free wool, free coal, and free
iron are not put on the free list with any reference, di-
rect or indirect, to raising revenue. They are placed
there to encourage manufacturers who are to be com-
pensated for any loss in this market by the markets of
the world where they will have the chance to struggle
with the cheaper labor of the Old World with whatever
energy they may have left after the struggle at home
with that same cheaper labor let into our markets by a
lower tariff which does not give us the compensation
even of a larger revenue.

'^ The doctrine of the Democratic platform that pro-
tection is robbery and should be abolished is compre-
hensible and sturdy. The new movement on behalf of
mitigated and sporadic robbery is contrary alike to good
morals and public faith. All false pretenses are unwise,
contrary to sound policy and sound statesmanship.
Hence many of us who are sure that the Democratic
platform is utterly untrue admitted its straightforward-
ness and directness. This bill, framed by those who
represent the platform, can not receive that kind of
praise. It pretends to be a revenue tariff, and does not
raise revenue. It pretends to give protection, but de-
stroys it in every indirect way.

'^ But while this bill in its principle, if it has any, is

OF HENBY CLAY AND SINCE. a07

not tinprotectiye, it will be absolutely so in practice not
only in its direct redactions but also in its indirect
redactions sure to come from the change from specific
daties to ad valorem, which is a marked feature of the
bill An ad valorem duty, as the name implies, is one
which varies according to the prica If prices could be
exactly determined nothing would seem to be fairer
than an ad valorem duty. But, unfortunately, prices
are very much matters of opinion, on which honest men
may differ much and rogues much more. Inasmuch as
the duty depends on the price, a cheat on the price is a
cheat on the duty. If a piece of goods is worth $6 a
yard and the duty is twenty-five per cent, the correct
duly is $1.60. If the price be invoiced at $5 a yard
and the fraud not detected, the duly collected becomes
$1.25, and the ad valorem, which seems to be twenty-
five per cent, becomes about twenty per cent., and not
only is the Government cheated out of its quarter of a
dollar, but the manufacturer is cheated out of one-fifth
of the protection his Government has promised him.
So great have been the objections in actual American
practice to the ad valorem duties that among the names
which can be cited against it are some of the most
illustrious in American history: Hamilton, Gallatin,
Crawford, Webster, and Van Buren, with Buchanan and
Daniel Manning. Such, too, has been the experience of
all other nations, and their tariff bills show such an
exclusion of ad valorem duties as makes even the act of
1890 seem objectionable on that very account That
the example given above of a piece of goods lowered
from $6 to $5 is reasonable is evident from this very
bill, where an undervaluation has to reach forty per

a08 THE TABIFF IN THE DATS

cent, which in this case would be from $6 to $3.60, in
order to create presumption of fraud. This, therefore,
is not theory. It is within the experience of every
merchant that goods which can not be purchased at all
in Europe can be purchased, duty paid, in New York, at
lower prices than like goods can be purchased by the
honest merchant who values them at their true market
value and pays the duty demanded by the Government,
and yet these ad valorem duties thus objectionable have
been increased in number everywhere, being substituted
in nearly all the schedules for specific duties.

^A serious general objection to the bill is that it
decreases the revenue according to the calculations
usually made by the Treasury Department as compared
with 1893 about $74,000,000. This large deficit, coming
as it does upon a depleted Treasury, is rather appalling
in a bill for revenue only. How this great hole in our
resources, as a Nation, is to be filled, no one knows. At
this date not even the Committee knows itself, unless
the President, anticipating in his message to Congress
the report of the Committee on Ways and Means, shall
afford to the Committee itself its wished-for due.
Against the consideration of such a bill creating such a
deficit and leaving it unaccounted for, the minority
vainly protested when the bill was laid before the Com-
mittee. Who would dare, if of sound and statesmanlike
mind, to create a deficit of $74,000,000, and blindly vote
it with no plan in sight whereby the Grovemment could
meet its expenditures ? Hiat same protest we make to
the House and to the country.*'

The minority then proceeded to a consideration of the
bill as to particular items. It will be impossible to do

OF HENBY CLAT AND SINGE. 209

more than notice as briefly as may be, their objections,
to a few of the more important schedules :

^' That which lies at the base of our iron and steel
industry is iron ore. The existing duty thereon is
seventy-five cents per ton. The revenues fix)m its im-
portation aggregated in the last fiscal year over half a
million of dollars. It is proposed under a ^ tariff bill
for revenue only/ to throw away absolutely every cent
of this large revenue by putting iron ore on the free
list. That^ however, may be said to be a comparatively
small matter in comparison with the effect that the pro-
posed measure will have upon our home industry by
the substitution for native of foreign ores, the product
of cheap foreign labor. Our ore industry, from what-
ever point viewed, is among the most important Ac-
cording to the Census figures of 1890, the production of
iron ore for the year ending December 31, 1889, was in
excess of fourteen and a half million tons. Its value
was more than thirty-three and a third millions of dol-
lars. Twentyrsix States and two Territories, North,
South, East and West, contributed to it. In the amount
and value of production Michigan stands first, and
whether Pennsylvania, a Middle State, or Alabama, a
Southern State, stands second is a question of doubt
The amount of capital invested is nearly a hundred and
ten millions of dollars, and the number of men directly
employed over thirty-eight thousand. The average
annual earning capacity for each person so employed at
current wages is $409.95. Of course in taking account
of the value of this industry to American labor there
must be added all the various labor processes, including
the transportation, necessary to get the ore from the

210 THE TABIFF IN THE DATS

hills into the furnace stack. The theorist who talks
about ^raw materials' never permits himself to realize
that, as has been well said, * Nature rarely dispenses
with transportation. She never separates, assorts,
cleanses, and feeds into the hopper or the stack' The
bill proposes to put into competition with American
ores foreign ores, some of which are produced at a labor
cost one-tenth and none of them at a labor cost greater
than one-fourth of ours. It proposes to bring our labor-
ers who get from $1.60 to $2 per day, and who work
from fifty-five to sixty hours a week, into competition
with laborers who work seventy-two hours a week and
get thirty-six to sixty cents per day ; our miners who get
from $2.25 to $2.75 per day into competition with those
who get from sixty to seventy-two cents per day. It
proposes to condemn to t^emporary idleness and ulti-
mately to divert into new channels, after an immense
loss, if not the whole at least a large part of an invested
capital of over thirty-three and one-third millions of
dollars ; to deprive our transportation lines of a lai^
proportion of their profits from the carriage of the ore
product, and to leave undeveloped treasures hidden
under the soil of twenty-six States and two Territories.
Foreign ore will take the place of our domestic product
to a great extent, and this will cripple if it does not
entirely destroy our home industry. Ocean freights are
so low as to afford no protection. Ore is frequently car-
ried across the ocean as ballast, and when freight is paid
at all it averages not to exceed five shillings per ton on
iron ore from Bilboa and other points in Spain. Under
these circumstances there is no question but that foreign
ores will take the place of domestic in all furnaces along

OF HENBY CLAT AND SINCE. 211

and within easy reach of the coast^ and its low price be-
caase of cheap labor cost will enable it to bear freight
charges for long distances even into the interior. In the
last analysis the placing of iron ore on the free list
means either the abandonment of that industry with
us, or the mining of ore to be sold in competition with
the cheap labor of Cuba^ Africa, and Spain.

'^Having sacrificed over half a million dollars per
annum of revenue to the vagary of free trade, this
tariff bill Vfor revenue only' proposes to affect another
large source of revenue by the serious reduction of the
duties on pig iron. That duty is now $6.72 per ton.
The duty proposed is 22^ per cent, ad valorem, or
about $1.60 to $1.90 per ton, a lower tariff than was
ever before proposed on this article. That suggested
by the Mills bill was $6.00 per ton; imder the
tariff of 1846 the duty was thirty per cent, ad valorem.
The revenue from pig iron during the last fiscal year
amounted to over one-third of a million dollars. While
decreased duties will add to importation, it is to be
noticed that the difference between present and pro-
posed duties is in the neighborhood of $5.00 per ton,
and that a large loss of the product and a large loss
of revenue are both inevitable. Pig iron, so far as both
capital and labor are concerned, is one of our leading
industries, and is followed in twenty-three States of the
Union. In the year 1892 our product was 9,157,000
tons, of a value of $131,161,089, and the prices at which
it was sold to the consumer were the lowest that it ever
commanded. The proposed duty will close all New
England furnaces and all east of the Alleghanies,
as well as those of the SoutL The market for South-

81S THB TABIFF IN THE DATS

em pig iron is necessarily found in the North, owing to
the lack of demand at the place of production. The
consequence is, that the competition of Southern pig
iron, which of all pig irons is made at the cheapest cost
in this country, fixes the prices in Northern markets.
That price is controlled to a large extent by freight
rates. Interior freight rates are very heavy as com-
pared with ocean rates. In many cases pig iron comes
from England and Belgium as ballast, subject to no
freight charges at all. In other cases it bears a burden
not to exceed five shillings per ton. At this figure
it can be carried to the Athmtic and Gulf ports, and
even to those of the Pacific. Assuming that our pig
iron, made at the least cost, is made as cheaply as that
made abroad, which is not true, it amounts to a
demonstration that all of our blast furnaces, save those
in the interior, must succumb to foreign competition.
Even the latter, if able to exist at all, must do so with-
out a margin of profit

^'During the year ending June 30, 1893, there was
imported into the United States 628,425,902 pounds of
tin plate which paid a duty at the rate of 2.2 cents per
pound, and thus produced a total revenue to the Gov-
ernment of $13,825,369.84. It is clear that the present
duty admirably serves the two-fold purpose of produc-
ing revenue for the Government and of affording reason-
able protection to an American industry. No sufficient
reason has been advanced for the destruction of an in-
dustry which in such a short period of time has gained
80 firm a foothold, and which promises such a brilliant
future. Side by side with the advance in the American
tinning of sheets, the manufacture of black sheets to be

OF HENBT CLAY AND BINGE. 213

tinned lias progreseed. According to the most reliable

evidence, the time is not far distant when, if proper

protection be continued, all the black sheets necessary

to make all the tin plate required in this country,

and all the tin plates so required, will be made

here. One of the provisions of the existing law

is that the duty of 2.2 cents per pound on

tin plates shall cease unless in some one of

the six years next preceding June 80, 1897,

the aggregate quantity of tin plate produced shall

have equalled one-third of the amount of such plates

imported and entered for consumption during any fiscal

year after the passage of the existing law and prior to

October 1, 1897. There can be no doubt that our cap

italists have invested their money in the manufacture

of tin plates upon the faith that this provision operated

as a Governmental pledge that the tin plate duty

under existing law should continue for a period of six

years. Had the language of the act been embodied in

an instrument to which individuals were parties of the

first and second part, it could hardly successfully be

contended that there was not a contract that this duty

would continue for six years. Of course, no claim of

legal contract can be made against the United States as

sovereign, but at the same time it is difficult to resist

the conclusion that in morals the contract exists, caUing

for recognition on the part of Congress. Nothing

seems more clear than that the proposed change of

duty upon tin plates is against the interests of the

Government as a revenue measure, that it threatens the

destruction of one of our most prosperous and growing

industries, narrows the sphere of labor, works no good

%U THE TARIFF IN THE DATS

to the consumer, and approaches dangerously near to
bad faith upon the part of the Government

^^The tari£E law of 1890 placed sugar, up to and in-
cluding No. 16 Dutch Standard, on the free list, to take
effect April 1, 1891. The duties which had been col-
lected from the people on sugar prior to 1890 had
amounted to the enormous sum of $1,460,412,227, these
duties being levied on an article of prime necessity of
which up to 1890, we had only been able to produce
about one-tenth of the amount needed for our con-
sumption. These duties were, therefore, levied under
the theory of a tariff for revenue only. The Fifty-first
Congress was a protective Congress, and, not believing
in a tariff for revenue only, wisely repealed the old
law, and for the first time in the history of the
country sugar came free to the people. This has
resulted in a direct saving to the American people
of over $200,000,000, less $16,717,726 paid for bounty
and $11,000,000 estimated to be due to the pro-
ducers for this year, which would aggregate $27,-
717,000, being a direct saving of over $1.25 per year
for each person in the United States. In harmony
with the doctrine of protection, the Fifty-first Con-
gress deemed it their duty to give protection to the
growers of cane, beet, and sorghum sugar by way of
a bounty. In view of the fiact that we have a vast
area of country, especially adapted to the growth of
sugar, and believing that it was a sound policy to
make the American people self-sustaining in an arti-
cle the annual consumption of which was constantly in-
creasing, and which requires an annual expenditure of
about $115,000,000, nearly all of which is paid to

OF HENEY CLAY AND SINCE. 215

foreign labor. Congress wisely provided, in the opinion
of the minority, that the grower of cane, beets, and sor-
ghum sugar should be paid a small bounty, to run until
1905, and to carry out the provisions of this law a con-
tinuing appropriation was made to pay the bounty.
The bill of the majority proposes to reduce the amount
of bounty allowed by existing law, beginning July 1,
1895, at the rate of one-eighth of a cent per pound per
year, and that on July 1, 1902, said bounty shall
* cease and determine.' The policy of paying bounties,
directly or indirectly, for the purpose of encouraging
certain industries, is as old as the Government itself,
and has been recognized in the statutes of both State
and Nation since 1789. This policy has been vali-
dated by the highest courts of our country.

^' The majority have made a general reduction on
agricultural products ai^d have made use in many in-
stances of the vicious ad valorem rate. This gives
peculiar satisfaction to the Canadian farmers and Ber-
muda members of Parliament, because it enables them
to come into our markets on more than equal terms. A
recent investigation develops the fact that our farms
and farm labor cost one-third more than the correspond-
ing farms and farm labor in Canada. So, lest the Cana-
dian farmer should be outstripped in the race for our
market, this bill fixes the duties on his farm products at
a rate less than 20 per cent., and gives him an advantage
of 13-^ per cent over our own citizens. In addition to
this, with all kinds of manufactured lumber on the free
list, it is no wonder that Canadian statesmen are boast-
ing that they get more by this bill than they could
hope to get by the most favorable reciprocity treaty,

8ie THE TABIFF IK THE DAYS

EDd this without the snrrender of a single advantage on
their part The competition which necessarily exists
between our millions of farmers will always regulate
the price of farm products in this coimtry so that they
will bring no more than a fair return. Why, then, open
our markets to Canada and deprive our own citizens of
them without forcing the Canadians to pay at least the
difference in cost of production into the Treasury ? One
of the proofs of unselfishness on the part of the Com-
mittee is illustrated in a duty equal to seventy-one per
cent on rice, a Southern product, as against an average
of less than twenty per cent on the products of North-
em farms. In exchange for this and for free wool the
farmer's machinery and binding twine are put on the
free list. Under the competition encouraged by protec-
tion the farmer's machinery has been cheapened to a
third of its former cost To give the Canadian manu-
facturer an equal footing may possibly produce a slight
reduction in the cost, but would only result in driving
out the small manufacturers; the survivors would be
compelled to form combines and trusts to continue in
business. In binding twine the result would send the >^
business to Calcutta, Hong Kong and Dundee; the pro-"*^*^^
duct would be cheaper for a time^ but in the end the
importer would get the profits and the farmer will have
to pay the same, or more, after domestic competition
is destroyed. Salt is a finished product Nearly the
total cost of its production is human labor. In the
Wyoming district, in New York, it furnishes employ-
ment to five thousand people; in Syracuse and in
Michigan to many more. The freight on salt from
Liverpool to New York for two years past has ranged

OF HENRY GLAT AND BINGE. 217

between tbirty-fiix <^ent8 and one dollar per long ton, the
averafi^e not being more than 60 cents. From the Wyo-
ming district the rate is $2.24 per long ton to New
York. Under the present duty of eight cents per
hundred pounds the importation in 1898 was 140,000
tons and paid a revenue of $801,972.60. To get this
trade the English merchant made a discount on salt for
America nearly equal to one-half the duty. He sells for
shipment here at a less price than to any English
province. Salt is produced in such quantities and in
such universal competition here that the cost to the
consumer has declined at the factory from $4 per bar-
rel to 40 cents for the same article. To find a market
here the English producer and the English ocean carrier
must and do pay the entire tariff. Free salt means the
surrender to England of our Eastern markets, to Canada
of our Northern trade. With free salt the Liverpool
merchant will supply the retail merchant at a price just
below the cost to the Wyoming manufacturer. The
consumer will doubtless pay about the same as now^ and
the difference between the cost abroad and the cost here
will be divided between the foreign producer, the ocean
carrier, the single distributing agent in New York (who
now gets a profit on every pound of salt shipped from
Liverpool to the United States or Canada) and the
American retailer, while the Government loses the
revenue. The American workman must seek some other
employment or accept a large reduction in his wages.
There is no excuse for putting this finished product on
the free list. It is unjust to the American workman,
the consumer, and the Government."

^The wool schedule as proposed in the Committee's

918 THE TASIFF IN THE DATS

bill is in some respects most reprehensible. It proposes
to destroy at a blow the great industry of wool-growing,
which now ranks as seventh in the value of its products
among the several branches of American agriculture,
and which has heretofore been recognized as an agri-
cultural product deserving and requiring protection,
under every Administration and by eveiy tariff act since
that of May 22, 1824. Nothing short of the total
destruction of this important industry can be counted
upon, as the consequence of placing both wool and
mutton on the free list

^^The bill deals with the wool manufacture in terms
scarcely less radical than those accorded the wool-
growing industry, upon which it so laigely dependa
It proposes to revolutionize the manu&cture of woolen
goods by transferring it from the basis of dutiable
materials to free wool, a change more radical than any
textile industry in any country was ever forced to make,
without the most careful provision for a safe and gradual
readjustment. Ignoring this feature of the situation,
the majority would compel our wool manufacturers to
make this leap in the dark, divested of the safeguard of
specific duties and subjected to lower ad valorems than
will o&et the difference in cost of production. We
have secured in the United States a magnificent wool
manufacturing industry, in which over $800,000,000 are
invested, making every variety of woolen goods and
employing more than a quarter of a million operatives.
This industry the majority offers up as a sacrifice on the
altar of tariff reform.

"Contemplated legislation, which imperils over $800,*
000,000 of capital invested in a particular industry, and

OF HENEY CLAY AND 8INCK 219

involves the fortunes or the occupations of hundreds of
thousands of its citizens, demands special provisions to
render such a transition as safe, gradual, and easy as
possible. This bill proposes to compel our wool manu-
facturers to accomplish the transformation in one month
— ^that being the brief interval allowed — after wool
becomes free, before the duties compensatory for the
wool duties are removed from woolen goods. These
manufacturers are expected to accomplish in one month
what their foreign competitors have been generations in
learning. Many of our best manufacturers will not
attempt the feat thus forced upon them. Realizing the
animus that underlies such legislation, so suggestive of
the Middle Ages, they will close their mills, pocket their
losses, and retire. They may truly say that the property
they invested, which gave employment to thousands
of our people at generous wages, which built up
prosperous towns on every water power in the Eastern
and Middle States, which added to the Nation's
wealth by increasing the earning and the consuming
capacity of its people, has been wantonly confiscated by
act of the Fifty-third Congress. The terms of the bill
are equivalent to an edict from the committee command-
ing every woolen manufacturer to shut down and keep
shut down until the bill becomes a law, and turning
thousands of operatives into the street The bill has
been carefully devised, apparently, for the purpose of
crippling the domestic manufacturer in advance of a
new tariff so that he will be left bruised and broken
when the time arrives for him to begin competition for
this market under duties from sixty to seventy-five per
cent* less than at present. The punishment meted out

220 THE TABIFF IN THE DAYS

to our woolen nmnufacturers for daring to invest their
capital in this useful and important industiy is severe
and condign. In order that there shall be no mistake
about the purpose to destroy the industry, the majority
further provides that the punishment shall be extended
over the next five years, during which the meagre pro-
tection allowed them is to further melt away at the rate
of one per cent a year. No such provision is found in
any other schedule ; no other class of duties has been
reduced so sharply as these ; no other industry subjected
to a complete reversal of economic conditions. The pur-
pose of the framers of this schedule is a purpose to
destroy.

^ One of the most amazing propositions of the bill is
that bituminous coal shall be put upon the free list, and
the million of dollars per annum that we receive from
its importation by way of revenue absolutely thrown
away. Goal has little value save as it gets it from labor.
It is worth almost nothing in the hill ; would be worth
absolutely nothing were it not for the prospect of being
mined. It is not a raw material, for it is not worked
into any further shape, but is consumed and done for at
once. Call it raw material in the hill, if you please ; it
then cuts no figure in a tariff bill. Except for a short
period, it has always borne a duty. Under the revenue
tariff of 1846 it bore a duty of thirty per cent, ad
valorem. No change has been made in the duty on it
since 1872. The Mills bill provided the same rate as
the present law — seventy-five cents per ton. Now it is
proposed to make it free. It is difficult to imagine why.
It is the most universally prevalent of all the subjects of
American industry. There are few States or Territories

OF HENRY CLAT AND SINCE. 221

that an inference with it will not affect. It appears that
on every side peculiar facilities are afforded to foreigners
to seize our coal trade if the duty on coal he stricken
down. And this simply hy reason of the difference he-
tween foreign wage rates and our own. The difference
in cost to the consumer from the removal of the duty
would he slight in the first instance ; the loss to Ameri-
can lahor and American capital would he incalculahle,
and the loss to the whole people in the last analysis he-
yond measure. To put coal on the free list is without
reason and against reason, and finds no semhlance of
defence save in the unjustifiahle desire to exploit a
theory at the expense of the American people.^'

It will be observed that the hill as originally in-
troduced provided for free raw sugar, free wool, free
coal, free lumber and free iron ore, and reduced the
duties very materially on a great many articles. Its
discussion was begun in Committee of the Whole,
on January 15, 1894, and on January 24th, a
measure providing an income tax was presented to
the House, and this, with certain internal revenue
features, were incorporated in the pending bill hy a vote
of 182 to 48. The bill was passed by the House on
February 1st, yeas 204, nays 140, not voting eight, four
Democrats and four Republicans. Of those voting in
the affirmative all were Democrats, but ten Populists;
of those in the negative all were Republicans, hut four-
teen Democrats. The members from New England cast
six votes for the bill and nineteen against it ; those from
the Middle States, yeas, 32, nays 34; from the Western
and Northwestern States, yeas 68, nays 59 ; from the
Southern and Southwestern, yeas 92, nays 8 ; and from
the Pacific States, yeas 6, nays 10.

222 THE TABIFF IN THE DAYS

The bill as amended was reported from the Com-
mittee on Finance on March 20th, and occupied the
attention of the Senate almost constantly until its final
adjournment on August l7th. A multitude of amend-
ments — some 634 in all — ^were proposed by the Com-
mittee and ultimately adopted by the Senate, the chief
of which were the duties on sugar, coal and iron ore,
and the substitution of specific for ad valorem duties, so
completely changing the character of the measure as to
render it practically a new bill.

The sugar schedule was the most important revenue
feature of the measure. It carried with it the abroga-
tion of the reciprocity treaties of the Harrison adminis-
tration, and the abolition of the sugar bounty of the
tarijff act of 1890, but the treaty with Hawaii was \e&
in full force. Next to it the income tax provoked the
greatest opposition ; Senator HiU of New York did all
in his power to stril^e this provision from the bill, but
his motion to that ejffect, on June 28th, failed by a vote
of 24 to 40. An amendment offered by Senator Man-
derson, of Nebraska, on July 2nd, continuing the sugar
bounty in force was defeated by a vote of 88 to 37, and
an amendment by Senator Peffer, of Kansas, making
sugar free was also lost — ^yeas 83, nays 39. Both pro-
positions were in the main supported by the Republicans
and opposed by the Democrats. The amended bill, or
substitute was passed by the Senate, on July 3rd, yeas^
89, all Democrats, but two Populists ; nays 84, all Re-
publicans except three, one Democrat and two Populists.

A conference with the House on its amendments was
asked by the Senate, and Messrs. Voorhees, Harris^Vest,
Jones^ of Arkansas, Sherman, Allison and Aldrich were

OF HENIIT CULT AND SINCE. 823

luimed as its conferees. The House, on July 7th, per-
emptorily refused to accept the Senate amendments, by
a unanimous vote, and appointed as its conferees, Messrs.
Wilson, of West Virginia, McMillin, Turner, of Georgia,
Montgomery, Beed, Burrows and Payne. A long and
bitter contest was expected, and to add to the perplex-
ities of the situation, Mr. Wilson, Chairman of the Ways
and Means Committee, in a speech to the House, on
July 7th, gave to Congress and the country the follow-
ing personal letter from President Cleveland, strongly
opposing the passage of the Senate bill :

^ The certainty that a conference will be ordered be-
tween the two houses of Congress for the purpose** of
adjusting differences on the subject of tariff legislation,'^
said Mr. Cleveland, ^^ makes it also certain that you will
be again called on to do hard service in the cause of
tariff reform* My public life has been so closely related
to the subject, I have so longed for its accomplishment,
and I have so often promised its realization to my
fellow-countrymen as a result of their trust and con-
fidence in the Democratic party, that I hope no excuse
is necessary for my earnest appeal to you that in this crisis
you strenuously insist upon party honesty and good
faith and a steady adherence to Democratic principles.
I believe these are absolutely necessary conditions to
the continuation of Democratic existence. I can not rid
myself of the feeling that this conference will present
the best, if not the only hope of true Democracy. In-
dications point to its action as the reliance of those who
desire the genuine fruition of Democratic effort, the
fulfillment of Democratic pledges, and the redemption
of Democratic promises to the people. To reconcile

284 THE TARIFF IK THE DAYS

differences in the details comprised within the fixed and
well-defined lines of principle will not be the sole task
of the conference ; but, as it seems to me, its members
will also have in charge the question whether Democratic
principles themselves are to be saved or abandoned.
There is no excuse for mistaking or misapprehending
the feeling and temper of the rank and file of the De-
mocracy. They are downcast under the assertion that
their {Mtrty fails in ability to manage the Government,
and they are apprehensive that efforts to bring about
tariff reform may fail ; but they are much more down-
cast and apprehensive in their fear that Democratic
principles may be surrendered. In these circumstances
they can not do otherwise than to look with confidence
to you and those who with you have patriotically and
sincerely championed the cause of tariff reform within
Democratic lines and guided by Democratic principles.
This confidence is vastly augmented by the action under
your leadership of the House of Representatives upon
the bill now pending. Every true Democrat and every
sincere tariff reformer knows that this bill in its present
form, and as it will be submitted to the conference, falls
far short of the consummation for which we have long
labored ; for which we have suffered defeat without dis-
couragement; which in its anticipation gave us a rally-
ing cry in our day of triumph ; and which, in its promise
of accomplishment, is so interwoven with Democratic
pledges and Democratic success, that our abandonment
of the cause, or the principles upon which it rests, means
party perfidy and party dishonor. One topic vdll be
submitted to the conference which embodies Democratic
principles so directly that it can not be compromised.

OF HENIIT CLAT AND SINCE. 225

^We have in our platform in every way possible de-
clared in favor of the free importation of raw materials.
We have again and again promised that this should be
accorded to our people and our manufacturers as soon
as the Democratic party was invested with the power to
determine the tariff policy of the country. The party
now has that power. We are as certain to-day as we
have ever been of the great benefit that would accrue
to the country from the inauguration of this policy, and
nothing has occurred to release ns from our obligations
to secure this advantage to our people. It must be ad-
mitted that no tariff measure can accord with Demo-
cratic principles and promises, or bear a genuine Demo-
cratic badge, that does not provide for free raw materials.
In these circumstances it may well excite our wonder
that Democrats are willing to depart from this, the most
Democratic of all tariff principles, and that the incon-
aistent absurdity of such a proposed departure should
be emphasized by the suggestion that the wool of the
farmer be put on the free list, and the protection of tariff
taxation be placed around the iron ore and coal of cor-
porations and capitalists. How can we face the people
after indulging in such outrageous discriminations and
violations of principle? It is quite apparent that this
question of free raw materials does not admit of adjust-
ment on any middle ground, since their subjection to
any rate of tariff taxation, great or small, is alike viola-
tive of Democratic principle and Democratic good faith.
I hope you will not consider it intrusive if I say some-
thing in relation to another subject which can hardly
ful to be troublesome to the conference. I refer to the
adjustment of tariff taxation on sugar. Under our party

326 THE TABIFF IN THE DAYS

platfonn and in accordance with our declared pariy
purposes sugar is a Intimate and logical article of rev-
enue taxation. Unfortunately, however, incidents have
accompanied certain stages of the legislation which will
be submitted to the conference that have aroused in
connection with this subject a natural Democratic ani-
mosity to the methods and manipulations of trusts and
combinations. I confess to sharing in this feeling ; and
yet it seems to me we ought, if possible, to sufficiently
free ourselves from prejudice to enable us coolly to
weigh the considerations which, in formulating tariff
legislation, ought to guide our treatment of sugar as a
taxable article. While no tenderness should be enter-
tained for trusts, and while I am decidedly opposed to
granting them, under the guise of tariff taxation, any^
opportunity to further their peculiar methods, I surest
that we ought not to be driven away from the Demo-
cratic principle and policy which lead to the taxation of
sugar by the fear, quite likely exaggerated, that in car-
rying out this principle and policy we may indirectly
and inordinately encourage a combination of sugar-
refining interests. I know that in present conditions
this is a delicate subject, and I appreciate the depth and
strength of the feeling which its treatment has aroused.
I do not believe that we should do evil that good may
come, but it seems to me that we should not forget that
our aim is the completion of a tariff bill, and that in
taxing sugar for proper purposes and within reasona-
ble bounds, whatever else may be said of our action,
we are in no danger of running counter to Democratic
principla With all there is at stake there must be in
the treatment of this article some ground upon which

OF HENBY CLAT AND SINGE. 227

\re are willing to stand, where toleration and conciliai-
tion may be allowed to solve the problem without
demanding the entire surrender of fixed and conscien-
tious convictiona I ought not to prolong this letter.
If what I have written is unwelcome, I beg you to
believe in my good intentions. In the conclusions of
the conference touching the numerous items which will
be considered, the people are not afraid that their
interests will be neglected. They know that the
general result, so far as these are concerned, will be to
place home necessaries and comforts easier within their
reach, and to insure better and surer compensation to
those who toil. We all know that a tariff covering all
the varied interests and conditions of a country as vast
as ours must of necessity be largely the result of
honorable adjustment and compromise. I expect very
few of us can sav, when our measure is perfected, that
all the features are entirely as we would prefer. You
know how much I deprecated the incorporation in the
proposed bill of the income tax feature. In matters of
this kind, however, which do not violate a fixed and
recognized Democratic doctrine, we are willing to defer
to the judgment of a majority of our Democratic
brethren. I think there is a general agreement that
this is party duty. This is more palpably apparent
when we realize that the business of our country
timidly stands and watches for the result of our efforts
to perfect tariff legislation, that a quick and cei*tain re-
turn of prosperity waits upon a wise adjustment, ^^nd
that a confiding people still trust in our hands their
prosperity and well-being. The Democracy of the land
plead most earnestly for the speedy completion of the

828 THE TARIFF IN THE DAYS

tariff legislation which their representatives have under-
taken, but they demand not less earnestly that no
stress of necessity shall tempt those they trust to the
abandonment of Democratic principles.'^

Astonishing and unprecedented in the annals of legis-
lation though it may have seemed to many of its hear-
ersy the President's letter was nevertheless received
with great applause by the Democrats of the House,
and with cheers and laughter by the Republicans, and
such may be said generally of its reception by the two
parties throughout the country* It served, however, to
intensify the feeling in the Senate against the original
House bill, and every effort in that body to recede from
its amendments proved unavailing. Caucuses were held
by the Democratic members of the two houses on Au-
gust 7th and 18th, at the first of which no definite
action was taken, but at the latter it was agreed by a
vote of 180 to 21 to concur in the Senate amendments
without change or exception, thus passing the Senate
tariff bill, and then to pass for the Senate's considera-
tion four separate bills placing sugar, coal, iron, and
barbed wire on the free list These were derisively
styled by the press as ^^ poj^un bills,'' and their pas-
sage was never expected, even by their authors.
Still the programme was faithfully followed. The
House agreed to recede from its disagreement to
the Senate amendments, on August 18th, by a vote
of 182 to 106. Seven Populists united with the ma-
jority party in the affirmative, and twelve Demo-
crats voted with the Republicans in the n^^tive.
The four separate bills providing for free coal,
free iron ore, free barbed wire fencing, and free

OF HENRY CLAY AND SINCE. ,229

sugar, were then introduced by Mr. Wilson in the
order named, and all passed by the House, that for free
sugar practically without opposition, and the others by
the requisite vote. In the Senate all were referred to
the Committee on Finance on August 17th, by a test
vote of 82 to 17, eleven Democrats and three Populists
voting with the Republicans for such referenca Dur-
ing the debate on this motion a letter was read from
the Secretary of the Treasury stating that if sugar was
placed on the free list the expenditures for the next
fiscal year would exceed the revenues by $27,478,058,
and if all four bills were passed the deficiency would be
$29,478,058. We shall see that although none of them
were enacted the deficit was nevertheless still greater
than here estimated.

As was naturally to be expected under circumstances
so extraordinary, President Cleveland did not sign the
Senate substitute for the so-caUed Wilson bilL He did
not, as might be supposed, veto the bill outright, but
p^mitted it to become a law by lapse of tim^ on Au-
gust 27th, the day before Congress adjourned, content-
ing himself with the following explanation of his
course, in a letter from the Executive Mansion, of that
date, to Representative Catchings^ of Mississippi :

^ Since the conversation I had with you and Mr.
Glai^ of Alabama, a few days ago, in regard to my ac-
tion upon the tariff bill now before me, I have given the
subject further and more serious consideration. The
result is, I am more settled than ever in the determina-
tion to allow the bill to become a law without my
signature. When the formulation of legislation which
it was hoped would embody Democratic ideas of tariff

230 THE TABIFF IK THE DAYS

reform was lately entered upon by Congress, nothing
was f aither fix>m my anticipation than a result which I
could not promptly and enthusiastically endorse. It is
therefore with a feeling of the utmost disappointment
that I submit to a denial of this privilege. I do not
claim to be better than the masses of my party, nor do I
wish to avoid any responsibility which, on account of
the passage of this law, I ought to bear as a member of
the Democratic organization. Neither will I permit my-
self to be separated from my party to such an extent as
might be implied by a veto of the tariff l^islation,
which, though disappointing, is still chargeable to
Democratic efforts. But there are provisions in the bill
which are not in line with honest tariff reform, and it
contains inconsistencies and crudities which ought not
to appear in tariff laws or laws of any kind. Besides,
there were, as you and I well know, incidents accom-
panying the passage of the bill through Congress which
made every sincere tariff reformer unhappy while in-
fluences surrounded it in its later stages, and interfered
with its final construction, which ought not to be recog-
nized or tolerated in Democratic tariff reform. And yet,
notwithstanding all its vicissitudes and all the bad treat-
ment it received at the hands of pretended friends, it
presents a vast improvement to existing conditions. It
will certainly lighten many tariff burdens that now rest
heavily upon the people. It is not only a barrier against
the return of mad protection, but it furnishes a vantage
ground from which must be waged further aggressive
operations against protected monopolies and govern-
mental favoritism. I take my place with the rank and
file of the Democratic party who believe in tariff reform

OF HENKY CLAY AND SINCE. 831

and who know what it is^ who refuse to accept the re-
sult embodied in this bill as the close of the war, who
are not blinded to the fact that the livery of Democratic
reform has been stolen and worn in the service of Re*
publican protection, and who have marked the places
where the deadly blight of treason has blasted the
counsels of the brave in their hour of might. The
trusts and combinations, the commimism of pel^ whose
machinations have prevented us from reaching the suc-
cess we deserved, should not be forgotten nor forgiven.-
We shall recover from our astonishment at their ex-
hibition of power, and if then the question is forced
upon us whether they shall submit to the free legisla-
tive will of the peoples' representatives, or shall dic-
tate the laws which the people must obey, we wiU
accept and settle that issue as one involving the in-
tegrity and safety of American institutions.

The millions of our countrymen who have
fought bravely and well for tariff reform should be
exhorted to continue the struggle, boldly challenging
to open warfare and constantly guarding against
treachery and half-heartedness in their camp. Tariff
reform will not be settled until it is honestly and fairly
settled in the interests and to the benefit of a patient
and long-suffering people.'^

But the people were no longer to be deceived; their
patience was in truth exhausted with pleas for a ^^ re-
form" that brought only distress to the business
interests of the country, that deranged our finances, and
instead of abimdant revenue, brought nothing but
deficiencies to the Oovemment. The result of the
November elections proved this conclusively, for never

232 THE TABIFF IK THE DAYS

in the history of the United States^ in any Con-
gressional election, was the party and doctrine of pro-
tection BO overwhelmingly endorsed. The Democratic
majority of ninety-fonr in the House of Bepresentatives
in the Fifty-third Congress was changed to a Be-
publican majority of one hundred and forty in the
Fifty-fourth Congresa Not only was the victory
sweeping and decisive in the North, or in States
usually BepublicaUy but for the first time in many
years, more Bepublicans were elected i&om the South
than Democratic members were returned from the
North, including even the strongholds of that party in
the great cities. The Senate, too, was partly recovered,
the Republican membership having been increased by
gains in legislative elections from thirty-six to forty-
three in a total of eighty-eight. The Republican major-
ities were everywhere phenomenal, and nowhere larger
than in the great States of New York, IHinois and
Indiana, which in 1892 had given their electoral votes
for the Democratic ticket

The income tax feature of the new law was at once
attacked by eminent lawyers on the ground of un-
constitutionality* It provided that ^Hhere shall be
assessed, levied, collected, and paid annually upon the
gains, profits and incomes received in the preceding
calendar year by every citizen of the United States,
whether residing at home or abroad, and every person
residing therein, whether said gains, profits or income
be derived from any kind of property, rente, interest,
dividends, or salaries, or from any profession, trade, em-
ployment or vocation carried on in the United States or
elsewhere, or from any source whatever, a tax of two

OF HEKBT CLAT AND SINGE. 283

per cent on the amount so derived, over and above
$4,000, and a like tax shall be levied, collected and
paid annually upon the gains, profits, and increase from
all property owned, and of every business, trade or
profession carried on in the United States by persons
residing without the United States." It was to go
into effect on January 1, 1895, and to continue in force
until January 1, 1900. On February 18, 1895, Con-
gress extended the time of making the returns, in that
year only^ until April 15th, and fixed certain new
exemptions or deductions in computing incomes. But on
March ISih, a suit was begun in the United States
Supreme Court to test the constitutionality of the
income tax, and arguments for and against it were
made by Messrs. George F. Edmunds, Joseph H.
Choate, James C. Carter, and Attorney Greneral Olney.
On April 7th the Court handed down its decision,
unanimously concurring that direct taxes ought not to
be levied by the General Gt>vemment except under the
pressure of extraordinary exigency; that such had
always been the practice down to August 15, 1894 ;
that so much of the new act as attempted to impose a
tax upon the rent or income of real estate without
apportionment was invalid ; that the tax Upon the in-
come derived from municipal bonds was invalid — and
that upon other questions raised by counsel the Court
was equally divided, and therefore expressed no opinion.
On the question of taxing rents the Court was said to
stand : Affirming the law. Justices Harlan and White ;
opposed. Chief Justice Fuller, and Justices Brewer,
Brown, Field, Gray, and Shiras. On the general ques-
tion of its constitutionality, the Court divided equally :

23i THE TARIFF IN THE DAYS

For the law, Justices Brewer, Brown, Harlan and
White; against it, Chief Jostice Fuller and Justices
Field, Gray and Shiias. Justice Jackson was sick and
did not hear the case. Mr. W. D. Guthrie, one of those
actively engaged in the case, was impressed with the
idea that upon a further hearing the Court would
declare the whole law invalid, and an application for a
rehearing was accordingly made and granted, the Court
convening for such purpose on May Tth. Arguments
were made against the law by Messrs. Choate and
Guthrie and for it by Attorney General Olney, and the
Assistant Attorney General, Mr. Whitney, and on May
27th the Court handed down its decision declaring
every provision contained in sections 27 to 37 of
the Wilson act to be unconstitutional, null and void.
The vote of the Court was as follows: Against
the law, Chief Justice Fuller (Dem.), Justices
Field (Dem.), Gray (Rep.), Brewer (Rep.), and
Shiras (Rep.); sustaining the law. Justices Har-
lan (Rep.), Brown (Rep.), Jackson (Dem.), and
White (Dem.). In concluding his opinion Judge Harlan
asked this pertinent question: ^^The judgment just
rendered defeats the purpose of Congress by taking out
of the revenue not less than $30,000,000, and possibly
$50,000,000, expected to be raised of incomes. We
know from the official journals of both houses of Con-
gress that taxation would not have been reduced to the
extent it was by the Wilson act but for the belief that
if the country had the benefit of revenue derived from a
tax on incomes it could be safely done. We know from
official sources that each house of Congress distinctly
refused to strike out the provisions imposing a tax on

OF HENBY CLAY AND SINGE. 235

incomes. * * * * If, therefore, all the income-tax
sections of the Wilson act must fall hecause some of
them are invalid, does not the judgment this day
rendered famish ground for the contention that the
entire act falls when the Court strikes from it all of the
income-tax provisions, without which the act would
never have been passed ? "

Another point of great contention may be mentioned
in this connection. The tariff act of 1890 provided for
an annual appropriation by Congress for the amount of
the bounty guaranteed the domestic producers of sugar,
and the sum estimated as necessary for this purpose by
the Secretary of the Treasury for 1895 was $11,000,000.
This sum had been honorably earned by the sugar-
producers of the country and its payment was naturally
expected. On September 6, 1895, however, Hon.
Robert B. Bowler, of Ohio, Comptroller of the Treasury,
rendered a decision on the constitutionality of the sugar
bounty appropriated in the Sundry Civil Bill by the
Fifty-third Congress (Democratic in both branches), the
case being that of the Oxnard Beet Sugar Company, of
Nebraska, for $11,782.50. Until this hour it had not
been generally supposed that the Comptroller had any
jurisdiction by which he could pass upon the right of
payment, but Mr. Bowler asserted his jurisdiction and
right to refuse payment of these bounties on the
ground of the unconstitutionality of the appropriation
— ^although made in obedience to existing law. He
quoted the decision of the Court of Appeals of the
District of Columbia, in a suit brought for a mandamus
to compel the Secretary of the Treasury, and the Com-
missioner of Internal Revenue to pay the sugar bounty

836 THE TABIFF IN THE DATS

provided in the act of 1890, and held that the Court
havli^ decided all such bounties to be unconstitutional,
its decision was one of which he was bound to take
cognizance. He therefore ordered the papers to be
returned to the Auditor for transmission to the C!ourt
of Claims, ^4n order that there may be furnished a
precedent for the future action of the Executive Depart-
ment in the adjustment of the class of cases involved in
these sugar bounties."

The tariff received but little attention at the third
session of the Fifty-third Congress, which b^an Decem-
ber 8, 1894, and ended by the constitutional limitation,
March S, 1895. President Cleveland discussed some of
its features in his annual message, but his recommendar
tions were not adopted, nor was any determined effort
made to amend the act of the preceding August in any
essential particular. He said :

*^ The German Government has protested against that
provision of the customs tariff act which imposes a dis*
criminating duty of one-tenth of one cent a pound on
sugars coming from countries paying an export bounty
thereon, claiming that the exaction of such a duty is in
contravention of Articles V and IX of the treaty of
1828 with Prussia. In the interest of the commerce of
both countries, and to avoid even the accusation of
treaty violation, I recommend the repeal of so much of
the statute as imposes that duty, and I invite attention
to the accompanying report of the Secretary of State
containing a discussion of the questions raised by the
Geiman protests. .... The Secretary of the Treas
ury reports that the receipts of the Government from
all sources of revenue during the fiscal year ending

OP HENRY CLAY AND SINCE, 337

June 80, 1894, amounted to $382,802,498.39, and its
expenditures to $442,605,758.87, leaving a deficit of
$69,808,260.58. There was a decrease of $15,952,-
674.66 in the ordinary expenses of the Government as
compared with the fiscal year 1898. There was col-
lected from customs $1^1,818,580.62, and from internal
revenue $147,168,449.70. The balance of the income
for the year, amounting to $98,815,517.97, was derived
from sales of lands and other sources. The value of
our total dutiable imports amounted to $275,199,086,
being $146,657,625 less than during the preceding year;
and the importations free of duty amounted to $879,-
795,586, being $64,748,675 less than during the pre-
ceding year. The receipts from customs were $78,586,-
486.11 less» and from internal revenue $18,886,589.97
less, than in 1898. The total tax collected from dis-
tilled spirits was $85,259,250.25; on manufactured
tobacco, $28,617,898.62; and on fermented liquors,
$81,414,788.04. Our exports of merchandise, domestic
and foreign, amounted during the year to $892,140,572,
being an increase over the preceding year of $44,495,-

878 The tariff act passed at the last session

of the Congress needs important amendments if it is to
be executed effectively and with certainty. In addition
to such necessary amendments as will not change rates
of duty, I am still very decidedly in favor of putting
coal and iron upon the free list. So far as the sugar
schedule is concerned, I would be glad, under existing
aggravations, to see every particle of differential duty
in favor of refined sugar stricken out of our tariff laws.
K with all the favor now accorded the sugar-refining
interest in our tariff laws it still languishes to the ex-

238 THE TABIFF IK THE DAYS

tent of closed refiDeries and thousands of discharged
workmen, it would seem to present a hopeless case for
reasonable legislative aid. Whatever else is done or
omitted, I earnestly repeat here the recommendation I
have made in another portion of this communication,
that the additional duty of one-tenth of a cent per
pound laid upon sugar imported from foreign countries
paying a bounty on its export be abrogated. It seems
to me that exceedingly important considerations point
to the propriety of this amendment With the advent
of a new tariff policy not only calculated to
relieve the consumers of our land in the cost of
their daily life, but to invite a better de-
velopment of American thrift and create for
us closer and more profitable commercial relations with
the rest of the world, it follows as a logical and im«
perative necessity that we should at once remove the
chie^ if not the only, obstacle which has so long pre-
vented our participation in the foreign carrying trade
of the sea. A tariff built upon the theory that it is
well to check imports and that a home market should
bound the industry and effort of American producers
was fitly supplemented by a refusal to allow American
registry to vessels built abroad though owned and navi-
gated by our people, thus exhibiting a willingness to
abandon all contest for the advantages of American
transoceanic carriage. Our new tariff policy, built
upon the theory that it is well to encourage such im-
portations as our people need, and that our products
and manufactures should find markets in every part of
the habitable globe, is consistently supplemented by
the greatest possible liberty to our citizens in the

OF HENEY CLAY AND SINCE. 239

ownership and navigation of ships in which our prod-
ucts and manufactures may be transported. The
millions now paid to foreigners for carrying American
passengers and products across the sea should be turned
into American hands. Ship-building, which has been
protected to strangulation, should be revived by the
prospect of pi-ofitable employment for ships when built,
and the American sailor should be resurrected and again
take his place — a sturdy and industrious citizen in time
of peace and a patriotic and safe defender of American
interests in the day of conflict. The ancient provision
of our law denying American registry to ships built
abroad and owned by Americans appears in the light of
present conditions not only to be a failure for good at
every point, but to be nearer a relic of barbarism than
anything that exists under the permission of a statute
of the United States. I earnestly recommend its
prompt repeal."

CHAPTER V.

To provide for the steadily increasing deficiency in
the Treasury occasioned by a change in our tariff laws,
the Administration had resorted to the policy of issuing
bonds, an expedient that should have been adopted
only after all reasonable efforts to secure an adequate
revenue to meet the needs of the Government had been
fully exhausted. This, however, was not the reason
given for their issue by the Secretary and the President
The excuse offered was that it was necessary to issue
the bonds in order to maintain the gold reserve of
$100,000,000 in the Treasury for the redemption of
greenbacks. Such a necessity had not before arisen
since the resumption of specie payments, and for the
first time the gold reserve of $100,000,000 was en-

OP HENEY CLAY AND SINCE. 341

croached upoD. Under the demands imposed upon it
by its tariff reform policy, however, the Administration
felt constrained to apply it to meet the daily necessities
of the Oovemment,and even this did not suffice to meet
the demands for the gold which was being so largely
used in the payment of the trade balances against us.
In January, 1894, $50,000,000 in bonds were issued,
and a second issue of $50,000,000 was again deemed
necessary on November 26, 1894. The sum of $116,-
000,000 was realized by the sale of these bonds, yet the
gold reserve in the Treasury was steadily depleted until
it had fallen to $58,468,178. On that day, November
36th, the President sent a special message to Congress
and urged the issue of bonds, payable in gold, instead
of in coin, as had heretofore been the practice, to re-
plenish the gold reserve and redeem the l^al-tender
notes of the Government. The amount of such notes
was stated by him to be about $500,000,000. ''More
than $172,000,000," said he, ''have been drawn out of
the Treasury during the year for the purpose of ship-
ment abroad or hoarding at home. While nearly $108,-
000,000 was drawn out during the first ten months of
the year a sum aggregating more than two thirds of
that amount, being about $69,000,000, was drawn out
during the following two months, thus indicating a
marked acceleration of the depleting process with the
lapse of time.'' In other words, while about $20,600,000
had been drawn out before the passage of the new tariff
law, about $151,400,000 "of the depleting process " had
followed its enactment. Still the President saw no
relief in the adoption of a policy that would at once
both provide abundant revenue and protect our home

942 THE TABIFF IN THE DATS

industries, by adjusting the tariff on protective lines.
" It will hardly do," he observed, ^*to say that a simple
increase of revenue will cure our troubles. The appre-
hension now existing and constantly increasing as to
our financial ability does not rest upon a calculation of
our revenue. The time has passed when the eyes of in-
vestors abroad and our people at home were fixed upon
the revenues of the Government Changed conditions
have attracted attention to the gold of the Government.
There need be no fear that we can not pay our current
expenses with such money as we have. There is now
in the Treasury a comfortable surplus of more than
$68,000,000, but it is not in gold, and therefore does not
meet our difficulty.^

The ^ changed conditions ^ had indeed ^ accelerated ^
the process of ^ investors abroad ^ getting possession of
the gold of our people. But it is not hard to see
why, under the protective policy, when we were
both making our goods and keeping our gold at
home, no similar ^'difficulty'' as that which now
alarmed the President had ever occurred.

A bill designed to carry out the President's recom-
mendations was introduced in the House of Repre-
sentatives on November 26th, by Hon. William M.
Springer, of Illinois. For this bill Mr. Reed, of Maine,
offered a substitute, entitled '^ a bill to provide for a
temporary deficiency of revenue." By this the Secretary
of the Treasury was authorized to issue bonds, bearing
not more than three per cent, interest, and payable in
coin, '^ to an amount sufficient to provide for and main-
tain the redemption of United States notes," as provided
in the specie resumption act of 1876, and ''to pay the

OF HENBY CLAT AND SINCE. 243

current expenses of the Government as long as the cur-
rent revenues shall be deficient." An elaborate substi-
tute was also offered by Hon. I^ichblas N. Cox, of Ten-
nessee, to meet the views of the Democratic members
who were, with him, opposed to gold alone being re-
quired in payment of the bonds. The substitute by
Mr. Reed was rejected by the House, on February 7th,
by a vote of 107 yeas to 189 nays, and that by Mr. Cox
by 55 yeas to 184 nays. The bill by Mr. Springer was
also defeated — ^yeas 185, Eepublicans 42, Democrats 93 ;
nays 162, Republicans 55, Democrats 107. Four Demo-
crats answered "present," and forty-eight members^
twenty-two Republicans and twenty-six Democrats, did
not vote. Mr. Springer moved to reconsider this vote,
and Mr. Hatch to table his motion, which prevailed by
135 yeas to 124 nays.

On the next day, February 8, 1895, President Cleve-
land sent another special message to Congress annoim-
dug the third sale of bonds under the present Adminis-
tration ^^to parties abundantly able to fulfill their un-
dertaking, whereby bonds of the United States author-
ized under the act of January 14, 1875, payable in coin
thirty years after their date, with interest at the rate of
four per cent per annum, to the amount of a little less
than $62,400,000, are to be issued for the purchase of
gold coin^ amounting to a sum slightly in excess of
$65,000,000, to be delivered to the Treasury of the
United States, which sum, added to the gold now held
in our reserve, will so restore such reserve as to make it
amount to more than $100,000,000." The bonds were
purchased by Messrs. August Belmont & Co., of New
York, on behalf of Messrs. N. M. Rothschild & Sons, of

M4 THE TABIFF IN THE DAYS

London, England, and Messrs. J. P. Morgan & Co., of
New Yoiic, on behalf of Messrs. J. S. Moi^an & Co.,
of London, as stated in a report of the Ways and Means
Committee of the House, on February 18th, and was
made without public notice or competitive bidding as
had previously been the practice in all such transac-
tions. This report reconunended the adoption of a
joint resolution authorizing the issue of $66,116,275 of
gold three per cent bonds. This also was disagreed to
by the House, on February 14th, by a vote of 130 yeas to
167 nays. Of those voting in the affirmative thirty
< were Republicans and ninety Democrats ; of those in the
negative, fifty-five were Republicans and 112 Demo-
crats, while two Democrats answered '^present '^ and
sixty members did not vote— twenty-three Republicans
And thirty-seven Democrats.

The first session of the Fifty-fourth Congress con-
vened on Monday, December 2, 1895. Hon. Thomas
B. Reed, of Maine, was the unanimous choice of the
Republican caucus for Speaker, and was elected by the
House over Hon. Charles F. Crisp, of Georgia, the retir-
ing Speaker, by a vote of 244 to 106. On December 17th,
the Speaker announced the appointment of the Ways and
Means Committee, as follows : Messrs. Nelson Dingley,
Jr., of Maine, Chairman, Sereno £. Payne, of New
York, John Dalzell, of Pennsylvania, Albert J. Hopkins,
of Illinois, Charles H. Grosvenor, of Ohio, Charles
A. Russell, of Connecticut^ Jonathan P. Doliver,
of Iowa, George W. Steele, of Indiana, Martin N.
Johnson, of North Dakota, and Walter Evans, of Ken-
tucky. Republicans ; and Charles F. Crisp, of Geoigia,
Benton F. McMillin, of Tennessee, Heniy G. Turner,

OF HENBT GLAT AND BINGE. 945

of Georgia, John G. Tarsney, of Missouri, Joseph
'Wheeler, of Alabama, and John McLaurin, of South
Carolina, Democrats. The Committees of the Senate
were reorganized on December 80th, by a vote of 80
to 28, to meet the change in the political complexion
of that body, by a special committee appointed for the
purpose. The Finance Committee agreed upon was as
follows : Messrs. Justin S. Morril, of Vermont, Chair-
man; John Sherman, of Ohio; John P. Jones, of
Nevada ; William B. Allison, of Iowa ; Nelson W. Aid-
rich, of Rhode Island; OrviUe H. Piatt, of Con-
necticut ; Edward O. Wolcott, of Colorado ; Daniel W.
Voorhees, of Indiana ; Isham G. Harris, of Tennessee ;
George G. Vest, of Missouri; James K. Jones, of
Arkansas; Stephen M. White, of California; and Ed-
ward C. Walthall, of Mississippi Hon. William P.
Frye, of Maine, was agreed upon for President pro tem.
of the Senate, and was elected to that office on Feb-
ruary 7, 1896.

President Cleveland recommended no changes what-
ever in our revenue laws, in his annual message to Con-
gress, December 8, 1895. The tariff question, indee
was treated very briefly, and in but a single short
paragraph, reading as follows :

^ By command of the people a customs-revenue sys-
tem, designed for the protection and benefit of favored
classes at the expense of the great mass of our country-
men, and which, while inefficient for the purpose
of revenue, curtailed our trade relations and impeded
our entrance to the markets of the world, has been
superseded by a tariff policy which in principle is
based upon the denial of the right of the Government

246 THE TABIFF IN THE DAYS

to obstruct the avenues to our. people's cheap living or
lessen their comfort and contentment, for the sake of
according especial advantages to favorites, and which,
while encouraging our intercourse and trade with other
nations, recognizes the fact that American self-reliance,
thrift, and ingenuity can build up our country's in-
dustries and develop its resources more surely than
enervating paternalism. "

The President did not attempt to show the progress
made in ^'building up our country's industries and de-
veloping its resources" under the tariff act of 1894,
nor did he offer any comparison of the gain by its
operations in contrast with the laM' of 1890 and
the previous protective legislation of the Republican
party. Neither did he show wherein the act of 1890
was " inefficient for the purpose of revenue," nor the im*
provement made under the new law in this or any re-
spect, as an example of the great advantages he
predicted would certainly follow the adoption of his
" tariff reform " policy. Such a review could not ha^ve
but impressed the country, and added to the enlighten-
ment of the people.

This message was quickly followed by a special mes-
sage to Congress, on December 17th, treating exclu*
sively of the Venezuelan boundary controversy, a dis-
pute that to some degree threatened serious complica-
tions and possibly a war with Great Britian, with the
enormous outlays that such a step would necessarily in*
volve. On December 20th the President sent a cPecond
special message to Congress devoted entirely to the public
credit and the condition of our National finances. So
serious had the situation now become, in the opinion of

OF H£KBY CLAT AND SINCE. 247

the President, that Congress was asked to forego its
customary holiday vacation. They must devote them-
selves exclusively to the public business to meet the
overshadowing emergency.

^ After all the efforts that have been made by the
Executive branch of the Government/' said Mr. Cleve-
land/^ to protect our gold reserve by the issuance of
bonds amounting to more than $1 62,000, 000, such reserve
now amounts to but little more than $79,000,000, and
about $16,000,000 were withdrawn from such reserve
during the month next previous to the date of my last
annual message, and quite large withdrawals for ship-
ment in the immediate future are predicted." The
remedy for this condition, suggested by the President,
was not to increase the revenues of the Government
until they were adequate to meet its expenditures.
The ^' sudden and unusual apprehension and timidity in
business circles " described by him was, apparently, to
be met only by issuing more bonds.

The President did not state, as might frankly have
been done, that the new tariff law had not begun to
meet the necessities of the Government, from the stand-
point simply of providing adequate revenues to meet its
expenditures. Up to the meeting of the Fifty-fourth
Congress the so-called Wilson act had been in force
fifteen months, and the official statements of the Treasury
Department . of the receipts and expenditures of the
Government under its operations up to September 80,
1895, had disclosed the following facts: The expendi-
tures exceeded the receipts in the month of September,
1894, $7,701,789.73. For the quarter ending December
31, 1894, the receipts were $61,211,058.11 and the ex-

a*8 THE TABIFF IN THE DAYS

penditures $88,824,246.70 — Bhowing a deficiency of
$274189188.59. For the quarter ending March 81, 1895,
receipts $77,091,042.75, expenditures $85,951,016.48;
deficiency $7,959,973.68. For the quarter ending Jiine
80th, receipts $75,215,297.83, expenditures, $88,291,-
801.76— deficiency $8,076,508.93. For the quarter
ending September 80th, receipts $87,390,864.90, ex-
penditures $95,445,734.09— deficiency $8,054,869.19.
A total for the period of $824,429,492.47 in receipts
and $888,885,817.59 in expenditures, or a deficiency of
$58,906,825.12. The revenues of the Government from
all sources for the fiscal year ending June 80, 1895, were
$390,873,203.80, and the expenditures for that period
$433,178,426.48, showing a deficit of $42,805,228.18.
Nor has this -condition since been improved. The
receipts of the Government for the quarter ending
December 31, 1895, were $81,880,927.46, and its ex-
penditures $87,360,517.12, a deficiency of $5,479,589.66.
For the quarter ending lliitarch 31, 1896, the receipts
were $81,338,047.69, the expenditures $86,554,291.05,
and the deficiency $5,216,243.36. This record is also
being maintained during the current month, for up to
April 17th the receipts of the Government were
$14,225,688.12, and the expenditures $20,956,888.00,
showing a deficiency of $6,780,699.88, or nearly
$400,000 per day. The aggregate receipts under the
new tariff law from September 1, 1894, to April 17,
1896, have been $501,874,155.74, and the expenditures
$578,207,013.76— showing a deficit of $76,332,858.02,
or an average per month of $3,452,745.

Obedient to the President's request^ Congress, despite
its custom, continued in session, and on December 26th|

OF HENBY CLAY AND SINCE. 249

Mr. Drngley, <}iiiiirmaa of tbe Ways and Means Com^
mittee of the House of Representatives, introduced a
bill to '' temporarily increase revenue to meet the ex-
penses of government and to provide against a de-
ficiency,^ and in connection with the matter submitted
an able and interesting report, from which the following
passages are taken. He said :

^Tour Committee regard the chronic deficiency of
revenue for the past two years and a half as a most
potent cause of the difficulties which the Treasury has
encountered^ and an important factor in the creation and
promotion of that serious distrust which has paralyzed
business and dangerously shaken confidence even in the
financial operations of the Government It is as inn
possible for a government to have a continuous de-
ficiency of revenue for two years and a half without
affecting its financial standing, as it is for an individual.
It is impossible also for a government to continue in
this condition without casting a shadow of doubt and
discouragement over all business operations within its
borders. The serious fact which we are called upon to
confront is that in the two and a half years that have
elapsed since July 1, 1898, this Government has had an
insufficiency of revenue to meet current expenditures
amounting in the aggregate to about $188,000,000.
Even in the first half of the present fiscal year the
deficiency will reach about $20,000,000 and about
$8,000,000 during the present month. And up to the
present time there is no sufficient ground for concluding
that this insufficiency of revenue will not continue
during the remainder of the fiscal year, and how much
longer no one can safely predict. If the consequences

950 THE TABIFF IN THE DAYS

of such a chronic deficiency were only the necessity of
borrowing money to meet current expenses in time of
peace, even this would afford abundant reilSon for in-
creasing the revenue. But the consequences are more
wide reaching than that. Insufficiency of revenue has
made it necessary to use the redeemed United States
legal-tender notes to pay current expenditures, and
thus to supply additional means to draw gold from the
greenback redemption fund — ^in short, to create the
'endless chain ' of which the Secretary of the Treasury
complains, and which has made it necessary to sell issue
after issue of bonds to replenish the reserve. In
response to the urgent call of the President, your
Committee have felt impelled to act with all possible
dispatch. Two facts have led your Committee to look
to an increase of customs duties as the most appro-
priate source of additional revenue. They are, first, the
fact that we are already raising a disproportionate
amount from internal revenue, which has always been
r^arded as a war resort. Indeed, Jefferson took the
ground that excise taxes should not be resorted to by
the Federal Government as sources of revenue in time
of peace, and the Democratic National Convention
maintained the same doctrine in 1884 ; and^ secondly,
the fact that by increasing customs duties on im-
ported articles which we can and ought to produce
or make at home, for revenue purposes, we can at the
same time incidentally encourage stricken industries
and materially aid in turning in our favor the balance
of trade which has been so heavily against us all
through this calendar year, and which has caused a
demand for gold for export that our Treasury has been

OF HENBY CULT AND SINGE. 251

called upon to supply. For so long as the balance of
trade is against us on account of excessive imports of
articles which we ought to produce or make for our-
selves, we must export gold or (what is the same
thing) promise to pay gold to pay for the excess of
imports over the exports.

''Your Committee have not undertaken a general
revision of the tariff on protection lines, as a majority
hope can be done in 1897, not only because they know
that such tariff legislation would stand no chance of be-
coming a law, but also because general titriff revision
would require many months; and the need is more
revenue at once. We believe, however, that this need
of more revenue is so great that a simple measure
increasing all duties of the dutiable list, and taking from
the free list of the present tariff a few articles that were
always on the dutiable list until August 27, 1894, and
which have always been important revenue producers,
and limiting the operation of such l^islation to about
two years and a half — ^until the present deficiency of
of revenue is overcome— ought to receive the approval
even of those who do not favor protective duties on
patriotic grounds ; and that the fact that it may inci-
dentally encourage the production of many articles that
we require at home instead of abroad will not be
r^arded as a ground of opposition under present cir-
cumstances. In framing the bill submitted for your
consideration it has been necessary, if action was to be
taken promptly, to resort to a considerable extent to a
horizontal raise of duties, for the reason that it would
have required months to deal with each article separ-
ately. Horizontal dealing with tariffs can not be justi-

852 THE TASIFF IN THE DATS

fied in ordinary time?, but in such an exigency as exists
now — so serious that the President felt it his duty to
send us a special message of extreme urgency — and
especially for a limited time, it is not only defensible,
but it is the only alternative. But while we have pre-
sented in the bill reported a horizontal increse of fifteen
per cent of existing duties on all the schedules but two,
which is an addition of less than eight per cent to the
average ad valorem rate giving about $15,000,000
revenue from that source, yet more than $25,000,000 of
of the $40,000,000 which it is estimated this bill would
add to our annual revenue will come mainly from wool,
which is taken from the free list and given a moderate
duty, and from manufactures of wool, which are given a
compensatory duty equivalent to the duty on wool,
which is always necessary when a duty is placed on
wool, in order to give the wool-grower the benefit and
make it possible to manufacture woolens at home. The
bill reported by your Committee proposes to make the
duty on imported clothing wool sixty per cent of the
duty imposed by the act of 1890, which would giye an
equivalent of six and six*tenths of a cent per pound on
unwashed wool, or about forty per cent ad valorem.
This reduction from the duty of the act of 1890 has
been made because the restoration of the full duty in
that act might seem to be too great a change from the
present law to those whose co-operation it is necessary
to secure in order to have any legislation, and not as a
measure of what might be done when aU branches of
the Government are in harmony with the majority of
the House on protection lines. The duty on manu-
factures of wool is increased by a specific duty equi«

OF HENBT OLAT AND 8INGK 253

▼alent to the duty on wooL The daty on carpet wools
is left at the thirty-two per cent ad valorem, where it
was placed in 1890. This is a purely revenue duty, as
we raise very few carpet wools.

^ Such lumber as was placed on the free list by the
act of 1890, without the slightest justification, is restored
to the dutiable list, but with a duty of only sixty per
cent, of the duties provided by the act of 1890 — giving
an equivalent of only about fifteen per cent. Such a
reduction from the low rates of 1890 is justified only on
the ground that the object of your Committee has been
to frame a bill mainly on revenue grounds, in the hope
that it would secure the approval of those in official
place whose co-operation is essential to legislation, and
who may be supposed to feel that in such an exigency
as now exists the public necessity must control"

The rules were suspended and the bill immediately
passed by the House, on December 26th, by a vote
of 205 yeas to 81 nays, the Republicans in the affirm-
ative, and the Democrats and Populists in the negative.
Thus the House acted with signal promptness and a
fairness and conservatism rarely equalled in a body
80 completely controlled by the party in opposition
to the existing Administration.

In the Senate^ on December 81st, Mr. Sherman offered
a resolution, declaring that it was owing '^ to injurious
legislation by the Fifty-third Congress, that the reve-
nues of the Government had been reduced below its
necessary expenditures, and the fund created by law for
the redemption of United States notes had been in-
vaded to supply deficiencies of reserve, and that such a
misapplication of the resumption fund is of doubtful

254 THE TABIFF IN THE DATS

legality and greatly injurious to the public credit," and
should be prevented by restoring the sum that had been
taken from it to the gold resenre of $100,000,000 that
ought to be kept In the Treasury for the purpose of re-
deeming Llnited States notes, and to hereafter s^regate
it from the ordinary current receipts of the Govern-
ment In support of this resolution Mr. Sherman made
a notable speech on January 3, 1896, in which he de-
clared deficiency of revenue to be the sole or controlling
cause of our financial difficulties. ''The President haa
mistaken the cause of our present financial situation,'^
said he, ^ in attributing it to the demand for gold for
United States notes instead of to the deficiency of
revenue caused by the legislation of the last Congress.
He places the effect before the cause. He proposes as
a remedy the conversion of the United States notes and
the Treasury notes into interest-bearing bonds, thua
increasing the interest-bearing debt nearly $500,000,000.
He proposes a line of public policy that will produce a
sharp contraction in our currency, add greatly to the
burden of existing debts, and arrest the progress of
almost every American industry which now competes
with foreign productions."

On the same day, Hon. Stephen B. Elkins, of West
Virginia, offered a resolution directing that no bonds of
the United States be sold hereafter at private sale or
under private contract. The effect of its discussion
apparently proved infiuential in causing a change in
the policy of the Administration, to such an extent that
the next sale of bonds was made after due advertise-
ment and to the general public.

On January 8th a caucus of the Republican Senatois

OF HEKBY CLJLY AND SINCE. 365

was held at which it was agreed to have the House
tariff bill reported to the Senate favorably, and with-
out amendment. But, on February 4th, the Committee
on Finance reported a substitute, striking out the
whole of the House bill and inserting in lieu thereof a
bill providing for the free coinage of silver. Mr. Mor-
rill, of Vermont^ Chairman of the Finance Committee,
attempted to have this bill considered, on February
18th, but his motion to take it up was defeated by a
vote of 21 to 29, All of the affirmative votes were
cast by Republicans, and all of the negative^ except five,
by Democrats— Mr. Jones, of Nevada, and Messra
Carter and Mantle, of Montana, Mr. Dubois, of Idaho,
and Mr. Teller, of Colorado, Republicans. On February
25th a motion to take up the bill was again defeated,
yeas 22, all Republicans, nays 83, Democrats 28, Re-
publicans 6, and Independents and Populists 6. The
Republicans voting in the negative were Messrs. Can-
non, of Utah, Carter and Mantle, of Montana, Dubois,
of Idaho, and Teller, of Colorado, and the Inde}>endents
and Populists, Messra Allen, of Nebraska, Peffer^ of
Kansas, Jones and Stewart, of Nevada, and Kyle, of
South Dakota*

A new loan of $100,000,000 in four per cent, bonds,
payable in coin, was advertised by the Government^
ostensibly to maintain the gold reserve in the Treasury,
which had fallen in January, 1896, to about $49,000,-
000. This swelled the aggregate of bonds authorized
by the present Administration, in a time of peace, in
less than three years, to $262,602,245.27. Bids were
opened in the Treasury Department at Washington, on
February 6th. It will be remembered that the Presi-

256 THE TABIFF IN THE DAYS

dent in November, 1894, had sanctioned the sale of
bonds to the amount of $62,400,000, to ran thirty years
and bear four per cent, interest, to a syndicate of
bankers at a premium of four and a half percent Four
per cent, bonds, due in 1907, were then selling in the
open market at 110. The new sale was, therefore^
watched with much interest, and it demonstrated the
credit of our GK)vemment among our own people^ to
the amassement of foreign observers. To quote from
Public Opinion, a non-partisan and independent news-
paper, the new bond sale disclosed the following facts :
^ There were 4,640 apparently genuine bids, aggre-
gating $568,269,850. The prices offered ranged from
par to 120, the great mass of bids being from 110 to
112. The New York World's bid for $1,000,000 at 114
was the highest for any considerable amount J. Pier-
pont Morgan, for himself and associates (the National
City Bank, Harvey Fish & Sons, and the Deutsche
Bank of Berlin), bid 110.6877 for the whole issue or
any part thereof. John A. Stewart^ President of the
United States Trust Company, for himself and about
180 banks and financial institutions, bid 110.075 for
$76,000,000. On February 7th, it was announced at
the Treasury Department that bids a^regating $66,-
788,650 above 110.6877 had been received, and that the
780 persons making these bids would receive the bonds.
The Morgan syndicate to have the remaining $83,211,-
850. The sale will net the Government about $111,-
000,000. The New York Tribune says that, excluding
the Morgan syndicate, of the successful bids nearly
$46,000,000 was from New York, nearly $9,000,000
from New England, about $5,500,000 from other

OF HENRY CLAY AND SINCE. 257

Eastern States, $8,000,000 from Central States and
Canada, $8,200,000 from Western States, and $1,400,-
000 from Southern States. It is understood that one-
fourth of the Morgan bonds will go to Berlin, but the
Tribune estimates that not more than one-tenth of the
successful bids were on European account. Two days
after the opening of the bids, the Morgan syndicate was
selling bonds of the new issue on the New York Stock
Exchange for 116^ ^gold' Government four per cents
of the same class as those just issued were selling at
116 J ^cash.' The Treasury gold reserve stood, on
Februaiy 17th, at $44,483,186."

The New York Chamber of Conunerce adopted a
resolution recognizing "with grateful pride the confi-
dence of the people in the financial strength of the
country, as expressed by the large subscriptions to the
Government loan," and declaring its belief '^ that the
extraordinary success of this loan should dispel every
doubt as to the ability and intention of the United
States Government to redeem all its obligations in the
best money of the world."

The sale proves conclusively that the financial strength
and stability of the United States Government is w^ith-
out parallel throughout the world. It also demonstrates
that the people are not deceived by deficiencies in the
revenue to meet the expenditures of the Government.
Granted a competent tariff policy, there would be
neither deficits nor bond sales, but a return to an in-
crease of the debt-paying power of the Government.
Business would be revived and increased and prosperity
again smile upon every section of the country.

In concluding this lengthy but hastily prepared re-

258 THE TABIFF IN THE DATS

view of our tarifif legislation, covering a period of more
than fifty years in our National history, it would be im-
possible for me to enumerate all the sources and authori-
ties from which my data have been drawn. The
Congressional Record has been constantly consulted,
Benton^s ** Thirty Years View'' referred to, and Blaine's
masterly ''Twenty Years in Congress" liberally drawn
upon, for of all authorities on tariff legislation it is at
once the most comprehensive, graphic, and entertain-
ing. No student could dispense with that standard
work, McPherson's " Handbook of Politics," and from
it has been taken the record of many details of measures
pending in or passed by Congress since the outbreak of
the Civil War. Hon. Richard W. Thompson's '^ His-
tory of the Tariff" has been consulted, and Henry V.
Poor's pamphlet, issued during the campaign of 1892,
has also been of service. Special acknowledgment of
indebtedness to Hon. Ellis H. Roberts' excellent
work on " Revenue and Taxation " . should be made,
while no source of authority has been more frequently
consulted than the several excellent political almanacs
of the time, notably the American Almanac, edited by
Mr. Spofford, Librarian of Congress, the New York
Tribune Almanac, from Mr. Greeley's first publication
of it to the present time, the encyclopsedic New York
World Almanac, and many others. The American
Economist, Public Opinion, and Review of Reviews
have also been frequently consulted. The language of
many writers has been freely adopted, perhaps too
literally in some cases, but the attempt has been made
in every instance to acknowledge the source and author.
The aim of the review is to be full, accurate and prac-

OP HENBY CLAY AND SINCE. 259

tical, to quote always the views and words of others
rather than elaborate my own opinions. No source of
authority to the student of to-day, the annals of Con-
gress alone excepted, is so valuable in such work as
this as the comprehensive, studious, and careful re-
views of Congressional proceedings made each year for
" Appleton's Annual Cyclopsedia.''

It has been my aim to present, as completely as pos-
sible, a review of proposed tariff legislation since the
close of the Civil War to the present time, as well as a
sketch of the measures actually enacted, to the end that
the student may observe the trend and purpose of the
leading political parties in respect to this economic
question. It is perhaps impossible to write of these
events without displaying to some extent partisan bias
or preference, but it has been my honest endeavor
to do justice to all who directly participated in them,
or have written or spoken as "those who speak by
authority '^ about them. Some subjects have been in*
troduced that may at first appear foreign to a review of
tariff l^slation, but this has seemed necessary because
a true presentation of the position of the several
political parties upon kindred subjects, notably those
relating to labor, immigration, and finance, often dis-
closes more clearly than anything else could the real
views of the opposing sides upon the main issue. But
I have not undertaken to treat any of these subjects at
length, or philosophically, simply to group together for
the busy man, as a ready reference, what has been done,
or proposed, by the two great political parties of the
country. The matter is not, and could not be, strictly
original ; much herein contained has already been used

2fi0 THE TABIFF IN THE DATS

by myself, as well as presented more ably by others.
The tariff question is just now commanding (and will
always continue to command) the serious attention of
the American people, until it is rightly settled. If I
have, from contemporaneous history, or otherwise^ aided
in the slightest d^ree the honest inquirer who cares to
contrast the past with the present, to compare history
with actual daily experience— to the end that he
may know the truth about the two great contending
systems, and thereby reach right conclusions ior his
guidance in promoting the progress and prosperity of
our country, I shall be glad. Ascertaining the truth,
and dismissing from our minds all prejudice and pre-
conceived opinions, let us have the wisdom and courage
to be guided by it.

Gantok, Ohio, May 26, 1896.

INDEX,

NAMES.

Adams, John, 1.

Adams, John Qoincy, 1 ; on advant-
ages ofprotective system, 8, 18, 14, 10.

Adams. Chas. H., resolution relating to
tariff, 47.

.^Bsop, reference to fable, 86.

Aldrich, Nelson W.,68. 101 ; reciproci-
ty amendment, 188, 140, 219 ; finance
committee, 1896, 241.

Allen, of Nebraska, 251.

Allison, W. B., 101, 140, 156, 219;
finance com., 241.

Ambler, J. A., tariff commission, 69.

Arthur, President C. A., Ist annual
message. 1881, 67; approves tariff
com. bill, 1881, 58 ; recojmmends re-
ductions, 1882, 61 ; approves internal
rev. bill, 1888, 68 ; last annual mes-
sage, 1884, 78

Ashmun, (George, 19.

Atherton, Chas. G , 12.

Ayer, Ira, Special Treasury Agent,
report, 1892, on tin plate, 174.

Bank, Nat City, N. Y., bid for loan,
252.

Bank, Deutsche, Berlin, bid for loan,
25;).

Barbour, William, letter relating to
thrtad. 84

Bayard, Senator, 68.

Bayard, Richard H.. 15.

Bayne, T. M., 99, 140.

Beck. Senator, 68.

Bemen, — , 19.

Benton, Col., 3, 4, 9, 10.

Bingham, Representative, 155.

Belmont, A. & Co., 289.

Black, James, 19.

Black, John C, 90.

Bhdne, James G., 27; letter of accep-
tance. 1884. 67, 72 ; declination, 1888,
80, 189, 166. 184.

Blair. H. W., 145.

Pland, R. P., 97. 102, 108.

Blodgett, Senator, 102.

Blount, — , 65.

Boston Thread & Twine Co., 85.

Bi^teler, A. R„ tariff com., 59.

Botts, John M.. 14.

Bowler, R. B, Comptroller, dedaion

on sugar bounty, 282.
Brewer, M. S., 146.
Brewer, Justice, 280, 281.
Breckenridge, — , 65.
Brower, J. IL, bill to repeal tobacco

tax 88.
Btown, Justice, 280, 281.
Brooks, James. 86.
Bryan. William J., binding twine on

free list, 158.
Buchanan, James. 8, 6, 15, 25, 29, 80,

81,204.
Buck, John R., error affecting knit

goods, 60.
Burrows, J. C. 99, 101, 140, 202. 22a
Butler, B. F., at Dem. Nat. Convention,

1884, 70.
Bynum, of Ind., 152.

Calhoun, John C, as a protectionist, 5,

9.
Cameron, Simon, 19.
Cannon, of Utah, 251.
Carlisle, John G., 50, 62, 68 ; Speaker,

1884. 64, 78 ; Speaker, 1886. 78, 82 ;

speech on home market, 1888, 86w

101, 186, 140.
Carter, J. C. 280.
Carter, — , of Montana, 861.
Casey, Zadoc, 18.
Cass. Lewis. 21.
Caswell, L. B., 147.
Catchhigs, — , of Miss., letter from

Pres. Cleveland. 226.
Chiproan. — , 158.
Choate, J H., 280. 281.
Choate, Rufus, 15.
Ciark, — , Alabama. 226.
Claytons, The, of Delaware, 19.

INDEX.

Cleveland, Groveri 72; inaugural, 1885, <
78, 77 ; annual message, 1887, revision
of tariff, 78, 80 ; letter of acceptance,
1887, 04, 95 ; annual message, 1888.
06, 147, 167; nomination, iSb ; letter
relating to tariff reform, 167, 171 ;
inaugural address, 1898. 185; calls
extra session of Congress. 187, 188 ;
message, Dec., 1898, 169; letter to
Mr. Wilson on conference. 220 ; letter
to Mr. Catchings on substitute tariff
law, 826 ; annual message, 1894. 288 ;
special message relating to bonds,
1896, 2Sif ; annual message. 1895, 241 ;
special measage. Dec. 20, 1805, relat-
tme to finances, 248.

Cobden, Richard 18.

CoUamer, Jacob. 19.

Conklin<r, Senator. 56.

ConnelCW. J., eight-hour bill. 1890,
144.

Converse, Geo. L., defeating Morrison
bUl, 1884, 64.

Corwin. — , 19.

Covert. J. W., quinine bill, 1879. 50.

Cowles, H. H. . amendment of int. rev.
laws, 1889. 98.

Cox, 8. S.. reduction on pig iron, 41,
66.

Cox, N. N., relating to bond issue, 289.

Crawford, — , 204.

Crisp, C. F., elected Speaker, 52d Con-
gress, 148 ; same, 68d Congress, 187 ;
candidate, 54tli Congress, 840.

Crittenden, John J., 15. 19.

Culbertson, D. B., 108.

CoUom. Senator, 155.

Ourtin, Andrew O., 29.

Dallas, George M., 16, 19.

Dahcell, John, 145, 202. 840.

Davis, David, elected President of Sen-
ate. 1881, 57.

Davis. Garrett. 18.

Davis, Robert T., constitutional amend-
ment, 1884. 65.

Dayton, William L., 15.

Delano, Columbus, 19.

Dickerson, Mahlon, 10.

Dingley, N. J., Jr., 99 ; bill relaUng to
worsted, 1890, 103, 140, 240 ; bUl to
increase revenue. 245.

DoMver, J. P.,240.

Dolph, Senator, 158.

Douglas, 8. A. 80.

Dubois, Senator, 251.

Dunnell, M. H., 59.

Eaton. W. W., bill for investigating
tariff, 1880, 58.

Edmunds, Senator. 102.

Elkins, 8. B., resolution relatifig to

bonds, 1096, 250.
Evans, Walter. 240.
Evans, George, 15, 19.

Famsworth, J. F., abolishing tax on
coal, 1871, 89.

Fessenden. William Pitt, 18.

Fiedler. W. H.. constitulional ^end-
mem, 1884. Go.

Field, — . 171.

Field. Justice. 280, 281.

Fillmore, Millard. 12.

Fisk, Harvey & Sons, 259.

Flower, R. P., 99. 140.

Fowler, Samuel, bill to encourage ship-
ping, 154.

Fremont, Gen. 20.

Frye, W. P.. 241.

Fuller, Chief Justice, 280. 281.

Garfield, J. A . 51 ; minority report on
iron, 1880. 52. 54.

Gallatin, », 204.

Garland, A. M.. 59.

Gear, J. H., 00. 202.

Geary, T. J., Chinese bill, 1892, 152,
15o

GentiT, Meredith P., 18.

Giddings, J. R., 19.

Gogcin, W. L., 18.

Gorman, A. P., 89, 165.

Graham, James, 18.

Graham, W. A.. 16.

Granger. Francis, 18.

Grant, U. S., approves tariff, 1870, 86;
message, Dec.. 1870, 87; message,
Dec.. 1871. 88, 89; message. 1878,
42 ; message, Dec. , 1874, 45 ; message,
Dec..l876, 46. r6.

Gray, I. P., 90. 160.

Gray. Justice. 280. 281.

Greeley, Horace, 254.

Qrosvenor. C. H., 240.

Guthrie W. D., 281.

Hale, Eugene, free salt bill, 1871, 40.

Halstead, Murat. 28.

Hamilton, Alexander. 1^^ 204.

Hamilton, Senate r, R6.

Harlan, Justice, 230. 281.

Harris. Senator, 219, 241.

Harrison, Benjamin, 94, 95 ; inaugural,
1889, 98; message, Dec.. 1889. 09;
special message, 1890, 189 ; message,
Dec. . 1890. 141 ; approves restoration
of State taxes, 1891, 147, 148 ; mes-
sage. Dec., 1891, 149: proclamation
suspending free products of Hayti

INDEX.

1892. 152, 154. 156 ; letter of accep-
tance, Sep., 1891. 160, 171 ; message,
Dec., 1892. 172, 185.

Harrison. William HeniT. 6.

Hatch. W. H., free salt bill, 50, 51.

Haakell, — , 68.

Hayes, John L., 59.

Hayes, Rutherford B., 50, 68»

Hawley, J. R.,44.

Henderson, J. S., 77.

Hewitt, A. 8., 75.

Hibhard, Ellerr A., 40.

HHI, D. B., 219.

Hilt, — .158.

Hoar, Senator, 108.

Hiacock, Frank, 77, 140.

Holman, W. S., 44, 165.

Hooper, — , 85.

Hopfdna, — , 202, 240.

Howard, Jacob M., 18.

Houston, Samuel, 4.

Hcyne, — , 6.

Hunt. Washington, 19.

Hurd, F. H., tarilf for rerenue, 58, 54,
65.

Ingalls, J. J., 78.
IngersoU, Charles J., 19.

Jackson, Andrew, reconunends tariff
revision, 6 ; resists nullification, 9, 16,
161, 281.

Jefferson, Thomas, 1, 87, 161 ; opposing
excise taxes. 246.

Johnson, M. N,, 240.

Jones, B. F., 80.

Jones, J. K., 219, 241.

Jones, John P., 241, 251.

Johnson, Richard M.. 4.

Johnson, William Cost, 18.

Johnson, Reverdy, 19.

Kane, John E., 16.

Easson, J. A., bill for tariff commis-
sion. 57. 60.

Eeifer, J. W., elected speaker, 56.

Kelley, William D., 86 ; abolishing int
rev. system 1870, 88 ; same 1871, 40 ;
advocating temporary loans 1874, 48,
56. 57, 59, 60, 62, 68, 82.

Eelseyof K.T., 85.

Eenner, D. F., 69.

Eerr, M. C, elected speaker, 46.

Eyle, Senator, 251.

Lane, Henry 8.. 18.
Lane. Joseph, 80.
LaFollette, R. M., 99.
Lincoln. Abraham, 29. 81.
Lowe, WiUiam M., 50.

Madison, James, 1, 2.

Mahone, Senator, 63.

Mangan, — , 19.

Manderson, C. F., 149, 219.

Manning, Daniel, 204.

Mantle, of Montana, 251.

Marshall. Samuel S., 85.

Marshall, Thomas F., 18.

McDill, Senator, 68.

McEerma, Joseph, 99, 104.

McEennan, Thomas I'., 14.

McEinl^, William, Jr., 54, 68, 82, 99,

101 ; introduces tariff bill, April 16,

1890, 108, 140.
McLaurin, John, 241.
McMahon, William H., 59.
McMillan. B., 99, 140, 220, 240.
McLane, Louis, 4.
McPherson, Senator, 101, 187.
Mills. Roger Q., resolution to revise

tariff, 1877, 48. 50, 58, 57, 58, 65. 78 ;

reports bill to reduce taxation, etc.,

April, 1888, 82 ; opening speech, 88,

97, 99, 108; minority report on

McEmleybiU.125.
Monroe, James, 1.
Montgomery, — , 220.
Morgan, Geo. W., 84.
Morgan. Senator, 168.
Morgan, J. P. & Co., 240, 252.
Morgan, J. S. & Co., 240.
Morrill, Justin S., reports tariff bill,

1860, 80, 86, 58, 60, 62, 73, 78. 187,

149, 187, 241, 251.
Morrison, W. R., 46, 47. 50. 63. 64. 65,

78 ; introduce bill to reduce tariff,

1886, 76, 76, 77.
Morrow, Jeremiah, 18.
Morton, Levi P., 94.
Mutchler, W. J., 145.

Neal, Lawrence T., 157, 159.
Niles, John M., 19.
New York World, 252.

Gates, W.C., 148.

OUver, H.W., Jr., 59.

Olne^r, Attorney Qeneral, 280, 281.

O'Neill, J. J., an eight-hour amend-
ment, 1888, 89.

Owen. W. D., Owen Immigration Law,
147, 148.

Oxnard Beet Sugar Co., 282.

Parker, Hosea W., 40,
Parker, William F., 29.
Parmenter. William, 18.
Payne, S. £., 99, 202. 220. 240.
Peck, Labor Commissioner, N. T.,
report 1891, 174.

INDEX.

Peffer, Senator, 919, 261.
Pendleton, John 6., 18.
Pendleton, Nathaniel O., 18.
Piatt, O. H., 841.
Polk, James K., 6, 16, 17, 18, ».
Poor, H. v., 354.
Porter, R P., 69.
PHce, Hinun, 64.

Randall, Samuel J., bOl to oat tea and
coffee on free list, 1871, & ; speaker,
46; speaker, 48 ; speaker, 1879, 60,
68, 64, 66 ; compromise tariff bill, 76 ;
argues for home market, 87, 88, 97, 98.

Rayner, Kenneth, 18.

Reed, T. B., 63, 83 ; aigument on tariff,
86 ; speaker 51st Congress, 99, 309,
330; bill to authorise bonds, 388,
389 ; speaker, 340.

Reid, Whitelaw, 166 ; letter of accept-
ance, 166, 171,

Reeves, Henry A. , reducing salt duties,
86.

Roberts, B. H., 354.

Rothschild, N. M. & Sons, 889.

Russell, C. A., 340.

Samford, W* J., introduces tariff biUs,
1880, 51.

Savres,— , 166.

Schenck, Robert C, 19, 86.

Scott, W. L., 89, 89. 93.

Sherman, John. 86. 68. 78 ; introduces
bm against trusts, Jan., 1890, 103,
187, 188, 140, 168, 189. 219, 341 ; res-
olution relating to gold reserve, 349,
360.

Shepperson, A. B.. 174,

Shiras, Justice, 280. 281.

Shively. B. F., bill reducing duty on
tin, 164.

Singer SewingMachine Co., 86.

Smith. Caleb B., 19.

Smith. Samuel. 10.

Speer, of Georgia. 68.

Spofford, — . 364.

Springer. W. M., 82, 148, 288. 889.

Steele, Georse W., 340.

Stephens. Alexander H., 18.

Stevens. Thaddeus, 81.

Stevenson, A.B.. 160, 170, 171.

Stewart, of Vermont. 102, 108,

Stewart, of Nevada. 261.

Stewart. John A., 262.

Sturgeon, Daniel, 16. 19.

Taylor, E. B., 102.

Taylor, Zachaiy. 81.

Taraney, J. C..841.

Teller, Senator, 261,

Thompson, P. B.. 69. 65.

Thompson, Richard W., 18, 864.

Thurman, Allen O., 90.

Toombs, Robert, la

Townsend, R. W., bin to abolish duty

on salt, 61, 68.
Tucker, of Virgittia, 60, 68, 64. 68, 65.
Turner, H. G., 99, 140. 880, 840.
T^ler, John, % 11, 18; censured by

House, li.

Underwood, J. W. H., 69.
United States Trust Co., 868.

Van Burcn, Martin, 4, 6, 801
y anceu Senator, 60, 140.
YestTSenator, 108, 819. 34t
Yoorhees, Daniel W.. 140. 187, 219, 241.

Wade, W. H., bill relating to eight-hour
law, and bill relatine to contract Ui-
bor. 146 ; bill forbidding purchase of

W products of cx>nvict labor. 146w
alker, Robert J., report, 17 ; tariff,
18. 26.

Walthall, £. C, 241.

Ward, Hamilton, wants free coal, 86.

Washington, George, 1.

Weaver, — . 171,

Webster, Daniel, 6, 6, 10, 19, 204.

White. H. M., 841.

White, Justice. 880, 38L

Wheeler. Joseph, 341.

Whiting, J. K., bill reducing duty on
lead. 164.

Whitney, Ass't Att'y Gen., 381.

Williams, Ruel. 16.

Wilmot, David, 39.

Wilson. William L., 187 ; bill repealing
Sherman Silver Act of 1890. 189 ; In-
troduces tariff bill Dec.. 1898, 193 ;
speech July 7, 1894, 220, 226.

Winthrop. Robert C, 19.

Wolcoit, B. O., 146, 341.

Wood, Fernando. 48; bill reducing
duties March, 1878, 49, 60; death
1881. 64.

Wright, bilas. 6. 16.

Wytiie, Chanodlor, 1.

INDEX.

8XJBJII1CTS.

▲rbitration, bill, 1867, tt.
Auitrift Hungaiy, treftty^ 160.

Barbados, treaty, 160.

BindiDg twine, W. J. Biyan's bill, 168,
218.

Bond lame, 286, 288 ; CleTeland's mea-
•a^ 289; same. 248: Bhennan't
speech, 260 ; Elkins bfll, 260 ; new
loan, 261 ; bids received, 262, 268.

Books, etc., lit.

Brasfl. treaty, 160.

British Ooiana, trea^, 160.

Batter, cheese, etc., 122.

Canned meats, etc., repeal of tax, 41.
Ghfaiese inunlgntion, bill, 1888, 89;

bOl, 1892, 162.
Clothing, tax, 88.

Coal, to abolish duty, 86; same, 40, 217.
Convention. Democratic National, 1808,

84; 1872,41; 1876,47; 1880,66;

1884, 70 ; 1888, 90 ; 1892, 166.
Conrention, Bepablican National, 1860,

28 ; 1868, 84 ; 1872, 42 ; 1876, 47 ;

1880,64; 1884,66; 1888,90; 1892|

166.
Contract labor, bOl, 66 ; bill passed, 78,

to prohibit immigration of, 146.
Corporations, tax on, 88.
Cotton, tax on raw, 88 ; duty reduced,

41 ; free bagging, ties, etc., 168.
Customs, receipts, 1847 to 1861, 26;

during foor years of tariff of 1867,

26; 1862 to 1870. 82 ; decrease, 86;

decrease, 41 ; duties reduced, 46 ;

1874 to 1880, 64 ; decrease, 264.

Debt, reduction, 84.

Exports, increased, 1411, 149, 160, 178.

Financial crisis, 1887, It
Force UU, 1888, 9.

Germanv, treaty, 160.

Oold. discoyerj in California, 22;

drain to Europe, 28, 26.
Great Britain, treaty, 160.
Grenada, treaty, 160.

Guatemala, treaty, 1601

Hawaiian, treaty, 148.
Hayti^ treaty, 160.
Honduras, treaty, 160.
Horses, etc., lUi, 182, 188.

Immigration, Owen law, 147, 148;
contract labor, 146.

Imports, exceeded exports, 26, 27.

Income tax, 82, 88 ; fixed at 2}^ per
cent., 86; to abolish, 64 ; attacked,
229 ; Supreme Court decision, 280.

Internal revenue, W. D. Eellev on, 88 r
same, 40 ; reduction, 69 ; bill passed,
62: amended, 1892, 162; decrease.

Internal taxes, 1862 to 1866, 88;

reduced, 88; reduced, 1870, 86;

reduced, 41.
Iron and steel, to reduce duty, 86;

same, 41, 116; productlcm, 142;

production, 176 ; ndls, 198 ; ore, 206,

Labor, arUtration bDl, 76 ; convict bill,
76 ; eight-hour law, 89 ; sundry bOls,
144 ; to adjust accounts, 146 ; con-
tract labor immigration, 146 ; pro-
ducts of convict labor, 146; to
enforce eight-hour law, 164.

Labor commissioner. Peck's report, N.
T., 174 ; Mass. report, 174

Lead, 164 : Harrison's letter relathig to,
168.

Leather, taxes, 88 ; duty reduced, 41.

Leeward Islands, treaty, 160.

Loans, recommended, 48 ; opposed, 44.

Hatch tax repealed, 64.
Mexico, war with, 22.

National debt, increase, 28.

Naval construction bill allowing foreign

steel, 60.
Nicaragua, treaty, 160.
Nullification ordinance, 19.

Panic, 1887, 11 ; 1867, 24, 26 ; 1878, 44.
Pinkerton detectives, 169.

IKDXZ.

Protection, inimfcal to enslaved labor,
l>. (See Tariff.)

Quinine, on free list, 60.

Pcvenue measures of 1846 and 1861, 26.
Revenue reform. Grant's messase, 87.

(See Tariff.)
Reciprocity, Aldrich's amendment, 189;

Harrison recommends, 189, 140;

treaties, 160,152.

Bait, etc, bill to exempt. 84; reduction,

85 ; to exempt, 40, 218.
Salvaiior, treaty. 160.
San Dominffo, treaty, 160.
SaviccB bai&s, tax, 83 ; deposits, 177.
Shipping, to grant registers to foreign.

Silver, 180, 181 ; ores, 180. 181 ; repeal
of act of 1890, 187, 189 ; free coinage,
251,

Slavery agitation, 21.

Spain, treaty, 160.

Specie, exports, 1655-6-7, 26.

Spirits. Dunnell*B bill, 69, 66.

Stamps, to repeal law, 64.

Steam engines, taxes, 88.

Suintr. etc., bill to exempt, 84; to
reduce, 86 ; use of machinery, T7,
117, 119, 188, 184, 186 ; reciprocity,
140, 160, 166; repeal of reciprocity,
201, 211, 219, 222; bounty, 282;
German protest, 288, 284.

Tariff, laws 1812 to 1816, 1 ; duties
never higher, 1828^ 6 ; 1888, 9, 10 ;
1842, 11 ; popularity of, 1842, 16 ;
1846, 18; provisions of, 1846, 20;
condemnation of, 1844, 21 ; 1867, 21 ;
1857, 24 ; bill of 1860, 80, 81, 82 ; no
constitutional power, 86; law of 1870,
86 ; Grant advises revision, 88 ; for
revenue only, 40 ; Grant's menage,
1876,46; Morrison's bill, 47 ; Mills'
resolution, 48; Wood's bUl, 49;
Samford's bill, 61 ; to Hbolish duty on
salt, etc., 61; to regulate duty on
hoop iron, etc., 62; on su^r, 62 ;
commission. 68; Hurd's bill, 1880, 68;
Arthur's message, 1881, 67 ; Mills on,
67 ; Arthur's message, 1882, 61 ; bill,
1882, 62 ; revised by passage of in-
ternal revenue bill, 63 ; Morrison's
horizontal bill, 64 ; Cleveland advises
reduction, 74 ; Morrison's bill, 1886.
76 ; same, 76 ; Randall's bill. 1886,
76; Clevelsnd's message, 78; Blaine's
letter, 1888, 80 ; Mills bill, 82 ; Mills'
speech, 88; Reed's speech, 86 ; Car-

lisle's speech, 86 ; Randall's speech,
87; Senate bill, 88; Cleveland's
message, 96 ; Mills bill, 97 ; Cowles
bill, 98 ; Harrison's inaugural, 1889,
98; message. 1889. 99; McEinley
bill, relating to revenue collection.
1889, 101 ; McEinley tariff bill, 189Cf
108; reciprocity amendment, 189;
Harrisons message, 142 ; " pop-gun "
bills, 1892, 168; Harrison's message.

1891. 149; Harrison's letter, 160;
Reid's letter, 166 ; Cleveland's letter,
167 ; Stevenson's letter, 170 ; Harri-
son's message. 1892, 172 ; Cleveland's
message, 1898, 186; Cleveland's
message, 188 ; same, 1898, 190 ; Wil-
son bill, 198; minorityreport, 202;
Cleveland's letter to Wilson, 220 ;
"popgun" bills, 226; Wilson bill
not siflped, 226 ; Cleveland's letter to
Catchlngs, 226 ; Cleveland's message,
1896,241; Dingley's biU and report.
246.

Tariff Commission, 68 ; Easson's bill,
1882, 67; appointed, 69; report, 1882,
61*

Tax, bill to abolish special, 86; re-
funded to states, 146.

Tea and coffee, 20 per cent, duty, 16 ;
bill to exempt 84 ; to reduce, 86 ; to

* put on free list, 89 ; dutv, 46 ; to be
restored, 68, 160 ; repeal of recipro-
city, 201.

Tin, 116, 126, 186; to reduce, 164;
companies manufacturing, 174; plate,
198.

Tobacco, to exempt, 84 ; leaf, 77 ; to
repeal tax, 98, 122, 128. 124. 186, 199.

Tobago, treaty, 16a

Tonnage, Detroit River, 176; R. R., 177.

Treasury, receipts, 80 ; receipts, 1878,
42; receipts, 1891, 161; receipts, 1893,
189 ; minority claim Wilson bill will
reduce, 206; receipts, 1894, 248;
receipts, 1896, 244.

Trinidad, treaty, 150.

Trusts. Sherman's bill. 1890, 102.

Venezuelan question, 242.

Washington Electric R. R. bill requir-
ing American rails, 90.

Windward Islands, trea^, 150.

Wool and Woolens, tax, 88 ; reduced,
41 ; bill, 59 ; to correct error on knit
goods, 60 ; classification of worsteds,
108 ; amount, 1889, and imports, 111,
112, 118, 124, 127, 180 ; reciprocity,
140 ; to make free, 168 ; Harrison's
letter, 168 ; on free list, 200, 214, 24B.

r

14 6274

HOME USE

CIRCULATION DEPARTMENT

MAIN LIBRARY

This book is duo on tho last date stempod bolow.
1-month loans may bo ronowod by calling 642-3405.
6-month loans may bo recharfod by bringing books

to Circulation Desk.
Renewals and recharges may be made 4 days prior

to due date.

ALL BOOKS ARE SUBJECT TO RECALL 7 DAYS

AFTER DATE CHECKED OUT.

iEaClfi. FEB 13 76

fE8-WB^

RECEIVED BY

MAY 8 U 1 9 ft 6

d B CUA l lON

LD21- A-40m-8,'75
(S7737L)

fitntral Libraiy

Unlvtrsity of Califaniia

■trktlfy

|.,^ \jy^ / ^^ »

SENEIUU. UBMRYUX. BERKELEY

B00015752b